What to Know About the Voting Rights Act After Historic Supreme Court Decision
The 6-3 ruling requires proof of discriminatory intent, a change critics say could weaken majority-Black districts across the South.
- On Wednesday, the Supreme Court handed down a 6-3 decision in Louisiana v. Callais, resetting the test for Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act to require evidence of discriminatory intent rather than discriminatory results.
- Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion leaned heavily on Chief Justice John Roberts' 2013 Shelby County ruling, arguing that voting safeguards enshrined in 1965 are no longer essential to address racial discrimination.
- Writing for the three dissenting liberals, Justice Elena Kagan warned the decision renders Section 2 a 'dead letter,' particularly affecting Louisiana where the 2020 census reported about 33% of the population is Black.
- Alanah Odoms of the ACLU of Louisiana stated, 'The Supreme Court has gutted the last pillar of the Voting Rights Act,' while Rhyane Wagner of the Black Voters Matter Fund cited Roberts' career-long crusade against voting protections.
- Observers expect dramatic overhauls of state maps by the 2028 elections, particularly across the South, as experts warn the decision continues rolling back measures vital to overcoming America's legacy of race discrimination.
54 Articles
54 Articles
Redistricting decision hamstrings potential congressional response
The Supreme Court’s decision limiting the Voting Rights Act appears to hamper Congress from passing legislation to restore the law’s protections for minority voters when states draw new congressional districts, legal experts say. In the hours after Wednesday’s 6-3 decision invalidating Louisiana’s congressional map, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., was among Democrats who called for Congress to pass a new version of the law to coun…
It's hard to avoid the conclusion that Justice Alito is gaslighting us
How do I explain what the supermajority of the US Supreme Court did this week to the Voting Rights Act? I'll put it this way. Six justices decided to pretend that racism no longer exists and that the history of racial discrimination no longer bears on the present. The gravity of their ruling cannot be overstated, but the ruling itself was based on fantasy.The point of the 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA) was ensuring equality. Everyone involved in i…
Why the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act after six decades in a blow to Black politicians
Supreme Court conservative justices voted to gut the Voting Rights Act in a ruling that says gerrymandering is fine as long as it doesn't intentionally involve race.
Supreme Court's redistricting decision hamstrings potential congressional response
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court’s decision limiting the Voting Rights Act appears to hamper Congress from passing legislation to restore the law’s protections for minority voters when states draw new congressional districts, legal experts say...
What to know about the Voting Rights Act after historic Supreme Court decision
In a 6-3 decision on Wednesday, the Supreme Court struck down Louisiana’s second majority Black congressional district, ruling it an unconstitutional gerrymander. The ruling has significant implications for future applications of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), which activists have long used to push for new electoral lines that protect the voting power of historically disenfranchised…
Conservative Review
The Washington Free BeaconDemocrats Pounce on Supreme Court Voting Rights Ruling, Demand 'Term Limits for Justices,' Impeachment
The Supreme Court’s decision striking down a majority-black Louisiana congressional district as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander is sending Democrats into paroxysms of hyperbole, with politicians competing to use the most extreme language to denounce the decision and the court that issued it, and to offer the most catastrophically dire description about its consequences.The post Democrats Pounce on Supreme Court Voting Rights Ruling, Deman…
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- 38% of the sources are Center
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
