Is race based congressional redistricting coming to an end?

[Rebel5soul]

Based on the questions from the justices today during oral arguments on the issue its future's not looking bright.

 

[ll74]

Probably.

But so should gerrymandering.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Did I read this right? Is Justice Ketanji Jackson actually saying out loud that black people are too retarded to vote?

 

[Rebel5soul]

Did I read this right? Is Justice Ketanji Jackson actually saying out loud that black people are too retarded to vote?

View attachment 2571361

You sure did. She did her best to give the die hard segregationist credibility.

 

[eric_erosfan]

Well that is what Texas just did. Are you saying it's wrong?

 

[Rebel5soul]

Well that is what Texas just did. Are you saying it's wrong?

You don't have a clue as to what this is all about............so sad.

 

[eric_erosfan]

You don't have a clue as to what this is all about............so sad.

I'll take that as a yes.

 

[ll74]

Did I read this right? Is Justice Ketanji Jackson actually saying out loud that black people are too retarded to vote?

View attachment 2571361

She was referring to the term as described in Allen v Milligan.(21-1086_1co6.pdf https://share.google/RdgKHzKJ8YazaZL1V (page 24) - Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion

That occurs where an individual is disabled from “enter[ing] into the political process in a reliable and meaningful manner

Feel free to read context rather than a tweet.

https://share.google/R5PJccWcVkRxwfLnG (page 99)

They're -- they're disabled. In fact, we used the word "disabled" in Milligan. We say that's a way in which you see that these processes are not equally open.

 

[YDB95]

Did I read this right?

I suppose you did read that right-wing propaganda right. But there's this crazy little thing called context...

 

[YDB95]

You don't have a clue as to what this is all about............so sad.

Redistricting with a singular goal of making more districts whiter and more Republican is race-based congressional districting. Just because you support it doesn't change that.

 

[ll74]

You sure did. She did her best to give the die hard segregationist credibility.

As I posted - she used the term in the same context that Chief Justice Roberts did in Allen v Milligan in the opinion from 2023

 

[wallstreetguy]

I sure hope so.

 

[Rebel5soul]

Addressing both clowns.

What is at issue here is some perceived mandate under the ACA that black districts MUST be drawn. Should the court decide that that isn't the case then states will not be obligated to draw black districts. That is not to say they CAN'T do so, they can. But they do so at the risk of being dragged into court for disenfranchising voters of other than the black persuasion. Got it?

 

[Lazaran]

Did I read this right? Is Justice Ketanji Jackson actually saying out loud that black people are too retarded to vote?

View attachment 2571361

And that ^ is what makes Chloe “Chicongo” Tzang a particularly racist MAGAt…

Pretending that Justice Jackson wasn’t using the term “disabled” in a context / manner specific to the law and the arguments at hand is pure racist (MAGAt) gaslighting. Justice Jackson was REQUIRED to use that term in her questioning of the arguments being made before her.

Justice Jackson could (should?) have used the term “crippled” instead, because racist republicans have “crippled” (disabled) minority demographics’ ability to vote, through various injurious actions.(legal and physical). See also: MAGAt republicans have “crippled” (disabled) some women’s equitable access to reproductive and family planning health services.

Hope that ^ helps.





We. Told. Them. So.

 

[ll74]

Addressing both clowns.

What is at issue here is some perceived mandate under the ACA that black districts MUST be drawn. Should the court decide that that isn't the case then states will not be obligated to draw black districts. That is not to say they CAN'T do so, they can. But they do so at the risk of being dragged into court for disenfranchising voters of other than the black persuasion. Got it?

I know what the arguments before the court are about.

I also know that assholes take pieces of it out of context to slander a justice and get clicks on the twitters.

 

[Rebel5soul]

I know what the arguments before the court are about.

I also know that assholes take pieces of it out of context to slander a justice and get clicks on the twitters.

How do you slander a moron that doesn't know what a woman is?

 

[ll74]

How do you slander a moron that doesn't know what a woman is?

Yes, you're really proving yourself a reliable example of slander.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Addressing both clowns.

What is at issue here is some perceived mandate under the ACA that black districts MUST be drawn. Should the court decide that that isn't the case then states will not be obligated to draw black districts. That is not to say they CAN'T do so, they can. But they do so at the risk of being dragged into court for disenfranchising voters of other than the black persuasion. Got it?

Well, I don't see anything wrong with segregation. It actually makes sense, but it would be better to do it more intelligently.

Allow, Black, white, hispanic and asian voters to vote in either (a) their own segregated by race electoral districts or (b) opt in for a general all inclusive electoral district. Make each district the same # of voters, make the districts geographically cohesiver and overlay Black, white, hispanic and asian districts over "general" districts. In all probability the Black, white, hispanic and asian districts would be much larger physically than general districts, but it would ensure segregated voting and representaives that closely reflect their districts without all the need for gerrymandering

Voters could decide for themelves if they wanted to vote in a racially segregated district or a general district.

 

[Rebel5soul]

Yes, you're really proving yourself a reliable example of slander.

Jackson is the poster child for the level of intellectual garbage you get when you worship at the alter of DEI.

 

[ll74]

Jackson is the poster child for the level of intellectual garbage you get when you worship at the alter of DEI.

You seem to enjoy slander.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

SCOTUS held a hearing on the Louisiana voting map case yesterday. They will rule on the case in the months ahead. Look who is upset.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1978535874431459578

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Here’s a good summary of yesterday’s SCOTUS hearing on the race-based gerrymandering case:

If the oral argument is a reflection of the eventual votes of the justices, there now seems to be a working majority of justices willing to bring “an end point” to race-based districting. The result would have tremendous legal and political impact.

Legally, one of the most litigated areas of elections would be largely curtailed. The Voting Rights Act would still be used to prevent measures to inhibit voting and to protect the right to vote for every citizen. However, the constant districting controversies over guaranteeing majority black districts would come to an end.

The move would also be a major additional move of the Roberts court to eliminate the use of race-based classifications in society from college admissions to election districting. In a 2007 case, Chief Justice John Roberts stated that position most succinctly by declaring that the “way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

https://jonathanturley.org/2025/10/...ased-districting-under-the-voting-rights-act/

 

[73Seahawks]

Based on the questions from the justices today during oral arguments on the issue its future's not looking bright.

I saw this coming 12 years ago, when they killed Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

 

[73Seahawks]

Here’s a good summary of yesterday’s SCOTUS hearing on the race-based gerrymandering case:

If the oral argument is a reflection of the eventual votes of the justices, there now seems to be a working majority of justices willing to bring “an end point” to race-based districting. The result would have tremendous legal and political impact.

Legally, one of the most litigated areas of elections would be largely curtailed. The Voting Rights Act would still be used to prevent measures to inhibit voting and to protect the right to vote for every citizen. However, the constant districting controversies over guaranteeing majority black districts would come to an end.

The move would also be a major additional move of the Roberts court to eliminate the use of race-based classifications in society from college admissions to election districting. In a 2007 case, Chief Justice John Roberts stated that position most succinctly by declaring that the “way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

https://jonathanturley.org/2025/10/...ased-districting-under-the-voting-rights-act/

Translation: They do NOT want minorities holding any political offices in this country ever.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Translation: They do NOT want minorities holding any political offices in this country ever.

Do you believe race-based gerrymandering should remain a permanent fixture in voting maps? Has nothing changed since 1965?