Republicans in Louisiana and Alabama want Supreme Court to change the definition of a Black Person

[Buddy]

Cliffs:

• Court cases in Alabama and Louisiana determined voting maps were gerrymandered violation of the Voting Rights Act, reducing Black voters ability to elect who they want
• GOP officials there state the definition is too broad by including folks that identify as Black and Latino (for example) and should be narrowed to Black only

Republicans In Louisiana Want Supreme Court To Change The Definition of a Black Person

A Supreme Court battle over new congressional maps created by Republicans in Louisiana is questioning who is a Black voter.

www.blackenterprise.com

 

[BaggerofTea]

Great thread OP

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

​

 

[TRUEST]

Op, pm me the names of each individual Republican. ASAP

 

[the elastic]

What's the play, here?

 

[Yehuda]

According to a 2003 Supreme Court ruling, the definition of “Black” includes every person who identifies as Black on census forms including people who identify as Black and any other race such as White, Asian or Latino.

Republican officials in Alabama are now calling for a narrower definition of what qualifies as a Black voter that does not include people who also identify with another race. They’ve argued in lower court filings that limiting the definition to those who just mark the “Black” on census forms and do not identify as Latino would be the “most defensible.”

In the Louisiana case, Ardoin v. Robinson, Republican officials argued for the definition to only include those who check just the Black box or both Black and White and do not identify as Latino.

Alabama dropped its push to redefine Blackness before appealing to the Supreme Court, but Republicans in the Louisiana including Secretary of State Kyle Ardoin, have asked the High Court to weigh in on which definition should be used in future Section 2 cases.

The situation is reminiscent of other tactics Southern states have used, including Jim Crow laws and current election restriction bills to suppress Black voters.

If the High Court rules in Louisiana’s favor, it could make it nearly impossible to use Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act to challenge district maps in the future.

Redistricting experts told NPR who counts as a Black voter in district maps has not been up for debate since the 2003 ruling.

“It was thought to be settled,” Morgan Kousser, professor emeritus of history and social science at the California Institute of Technology, told NPR.

In Louisiana, however, Republican state officials say the 2003 case heard by the Supreme Court, which deals with Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, shouldn’t apply to Section 2 and that a narrower definition of who a Black voter is would “prevent state actors from artificially inflating the minority counts of their redistricting plans.”

Both arguments failed in lower courts.

 

[Software]

Whenever you see "Republicans want the Supreme Court to..." you know it's bout to be some bullshyt

 

[OperationNumbNutts]

Comments will be interesting. Coli members where happy when California's governor did it.

 

[BobbyWojak]

Comments will be interesting. Coli members where happy when California's governor did it.

 

[Elim Garak]

These motherfukkers already gerrymandering kings and want more power to disenfranchise even more people.

 

[Elim Garak]

Comments will be interesting. Coli members where happy when California's governor did it.

Neg

 

[NotAnFBIagent]

One drop rule
Keep that same energy your grandfathers had

 

[Devilinurear]

So in there minds you can't be white and hispanic?

What do they think about people from Spain.

 

[OperationNumbNutts]

Neg

Get your panties wet if you want to breh. At least make an argument contradicting my statement.

 

[8WON6]

"we think yall gerrymandering black districts"
"define black

"