The US Supreme Court knocks down the electoral map of Louisiana that guaranteed the vote of the black community

The US Supreme Court knocks down the electoral map of Louisiana that guaranteed the vote of the black community

This Wednesday, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the electoral map of the state of Louisiana that guaranteed the vote of the black community months before the midterm elections. midtermsscheduled for early November.

The controversy revolves around section 2 of the so-called Voting Rights Act of 1965, enacted to correct centuries of exclusion in the United States and guarantee the right to vote for African-American communities in the country.

In February 2022, the Louisiana state legislature, with a Republican majority, approved a map with only one majority black district of the six existing districts despite the fact that a census carried out years earlier determined that almost a third of the population was black.

The case ended in a legal dispute and a judge determined that the map violated the aforementioned 1965 law, forcing the state to create a second majority-black district. The Supreme Court judges, with a conservative majority, have now ruled that this new map “violates the Fourteenth Amendment”, ruling that the state should not prioritize race because this means discriminating against the rest of white voters.

Specifically, the court’s majority opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito, describes the decision as an “update” to the framework that has governed cases related to the Voting Rights Act for decades, while the liberal justices, in their dissenting opinion, have called the ruling a “demolition” of the aforementioned law.

Trump celebrates the decision: “Great victory for equality before the law”

The measure has been applauded by the president of the United States, Donald Trump, who in a message on social networks has presented the ruling as “a great victory for equality before the law”, claiming that “it restores the Voting Rights Act to its original purpose: to protect against intentional racial discrimination.”

Likewise, the tenant of the White House has conveyed his gratitude to “brilliant Judge Samuel Alito for writing this important and pertinent opinion.” The state’s Republican governor, Jeff Landry, has also praised the Supreme Court’s decision, which he has defended by arguing that “drawing districts for political reasons is a prerogative of the States, not a violation of federal civil rights.”

“Federal judges cannot force a state to participate in race-based redistricting, and plaintiffs can no longer package partisan disagreements as Voting Rights Act cases,” he argued.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) has described the Supreme Court’s decision as a “devastating blow” and has stated that the ruling gives free rein to “corrupt politicians” to “manipulate the system by silencing entire communities.”

“The Supreme Court has betrayed black voters, it has betrayed America, and it has betrayed our democracy. This ruling represents a major setback for our nation and threatens to erode our hard-won victories, for which we have fought, shed blood, and died,” he said in a statement.

For its part, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in Louisiana has indicated that the ruling is “a profound betrayal of the legacy of the civil rights movement” and that the representation of black, Latino, Native and other voters “will increasingly depend on the good will of legislatures rather than the law.”

“In practical terms, this means that even where racial discrimination in voting is clear and continuous, communities will be left without the most important weapon they have to prevent states from attracting districts that dilute their political power,” he argued in a statement.

Former US President Barack Obama has highlighted in a message on his social networks that the decision “dismantles a key pillar” of said legislation, thus allowing the voting power of “racial minorities” to be “diluted and weakened”, as long as the legislative ones do so “under the guise of partisanship rather than explicit racial bias.”

“It serves as just one more example of how a majority of the current court seems determined to abandon its vital role in ensuring equal participation in our democracy and protecting the rights of minority groups against the excesses of the majority,” he said.

However, he has been positive that “such setbacks can be overcome.” “That will only happen if citizens across the country who cherish our democratic ideals continue to mobilize and vote in record numbers, not just in upcoming midterm elections or high-profile races, but in every election and at every level,” he said.

source