on March 18th, justices sparred with four lawyers over whether the electoral map for Virginia’s House of Delegates violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s bar on racial discrimination. The hearing inwas bracing but, given its context and timing, rather belated. The map under scrutiny was drafted in 2011, following the 2010 census. Challengers filed suit in 2014 against 12 majority-black districts which, they say, were drawn with too much of an emphasis on race.
Paul Clement, a veteran Supreme Court litigator who argued for the House of Delegates, called this position “deeply flawed” with “enormous consequences” for all-too-common situations when a state government’s legislative and executive branches are at loggerheads. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg responded that the House of Delegates “isn't even the legislative branch; it's one house of the legislature”. Justice Sotomayor agreed. The 2011 map “doesn't belong to the House”, she said.
The hearing did not get much clearer when it turned to the heart of the issue: whether the 2011 map violated the constitution. Virginia says it aimed at a black voting population in each of the 11 districts of at least 55% to satisfy the terms of the Voting Rights Act, a 1965 law that protects minorities’ right to elect “candidates of choice”. But the maps’ challengers said the 55% target was, in effect, too much of a good thing that diluted black voters’ influence in neighbouring districts.
For Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Mr Elias’s position denies states the “flexibility” they need to abide by the terms of the Voting Rights Act while also avoiding a constitutional violation. If Virginia had aimed to create districts that were just “52% or 53%” African-American, Justice Kavanaugh said, it “would be hammered from the other side”. Mr Elias’s response was sensible if subtle: the key isn’t the percentage itself but the method by which the state arrives at it.
ruling, the Supreme Court struck down the section of the Voting Rights Act that Virginia says compelled it to use the target of 55% black voters. So when the next round of redistricting comes early in the coming decade, states with chequered histories of racial discrimination will no longer be required to get their maps approved by the Department of Justice. It is unclear what that new lenience will mean for minority voters.
Source: Law Daily Report (lawdailyreport.net)
If you think my sanity wants having P as a guardian you won’t ever win anything with me...
We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Supreme Court weighs race factor in Virginia gerrymandering caseSupreme Court wades into long-running dispute over use of race as a factor in drawing Virginia’s state legislative districts--setting the stage for a decision that could reshape the electoral landscape in a key swing state on the eve of the 2020 election. Cool BUT When is AndrewYangVFA Andrew Yang coming on the network yang2020 I'm not surprised that democrats use race to define districts. The electoral process is irrelevant
Source: ABC - 🏆 471. / 51 Read more »
Supreme Court weighs Virginia racial dispute over electoral mapsU.S. Supreme Court justices on Monday wrestled for the second time over whether ... This is not correct. The Supreme Court weights a majority of votes of people of colour. It's a number of different classifications and demographics.
Source: Reuters - 🏆 2. / 97 Read more »
Supreme Court to hear Virginia’s appeal over D.C. area sniper’s no-parole prison termThe Supreme Court on Monday agreed to consider Virginia’s plea to reinstate the life-without-parole sentence of a man who as a teenager participated in sniper shootings that terrorized the Washington region in 2002. I lived in DC at the time. That was crazy. I still remember gas stations placing moving vans in strategic locations to protect people filling up their cars from sniper fire. LockHimUp and throw away the key
Source: latimes - 🏆 11. / 82 Read more »
Supreme Court to consider whether Beltway sniper Lee Boyd Malvo deserves new sentencingBetween Sept. 5 and Oct. 22, 2002, John Allen Muhammad and Malvo killed 10 people and wounded others in sniper attacks in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia. Sure, give him the death sentence and save the taxpayers the expense of supporting him for another 20 or more years. We must allow ourselves to find root cause for mass killings by guns. And accept the fact for what it is. I ask myself, why is it 90% White Males and White Supremacist emboldened, American Citizens? no
Source: washingtonpost - 🏆 95. / 72 Read more »
Supreme Court to consider sentence for D.C.-area sniperSupreme Court to consider new sentence for Lee Boyd Malvo who was sentenced to life in prison for his role in a series of shootings that killed 10 people in the Washington, DC, area in 2002. Why waste time on him? If he is guilty, let him rot. Having lived in the DMV when this was going on, what a nightmare this was! People weren’t going outside....
Source: NBCNews - 🏆 10. / 86 Read more »
Mexico Senate picks wife of president's business ally for Supreme CourtMexico's Senate on Tuesday chose the wife of a business ally of President A... QuestionMThings This is the most surprising thing I've seen all year. Corrupt Mexico is looking more like the US every day.
Source: Reuters - 🏆 2. / 97 Read more »
Supreme Court rejects Hawaii B&B that refused to serve lesbian coupleSupreme Court declines to hear challenge to lower court ruling that found that the owner of a Hawaii bed and breakfast violated a state anti-discrimination law by turning away a lesbian couple, citing Christian beliefs. Who cares? Religious beliefs always win in Supreme Court cases. It’s disgusting but true. The US is not a secular nation as they lead many to believe. GOOD
Source: NBCNews - 🏆 10. / 86 Read more »
Supreme Court agrees to hear deadly DC sniper shootings caseWASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to consider Virginia's plea to reinstate the life-without-parole sentence of a man who as a teenager participated in sniper shootings that... NO One of the least reported Islamic terrorist attacks of all time.
Source: AP - 🏆 728. / 51 Read more »
Supreme Court will take up immigration-related case next termThe Supreme Court agreed on Monday to hear a case next term concerning Kansas' prosecution of three undocumented immigrants for using stolen Social Security numbers in an effort to gain employment. Is Ruth sleeping again? If American citizens can be prosecuted for using stolen Social Security numbers, it is ludicrous to think that illigal immigrants cannot be prosecuted for the same crime!! Is that a stuffed head of RBG? 🤔
Source: cnnbrk - 🏆 393. / 55 Read more »