Supreme Court takes up Louisiana racial gerrymandering dispute
Source: NBC News
Supreme Court takes up Louisiana racial gerrymandering dispute
Litigation over the consideration of race in drawing congressional districts has seen the state sued from left and right.
Nov. 4, 2024, 9:36 AM EST
By Lawrence Hurley
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to decide a thorny legal dispute from Louisiana involving the state's effort to draw a congressional district map while navigating claims it is unlawfully considering race. ... The case has no immediate impact on this year's elections in the state, which is using a map that includes two majority black districts out of six. ... During the course of drawing a map based on 2020 census data, the Republican-led state has been sued from two directions.
One lawsuit claimed that the state had to draw a map containing two majority Black districts to comply with the federal Voting Rights Act. But once that case was resolved with a victory for the civil rights plaintiffs, the state's new map that was drawn to comply with that finding was challenged by a group of "non-African American" voters who said it violated the Constitution's 14th Amendment by discriminating against them.
A federal court struck the new map down, but with time running out to finalize the congressional districts before this year’s elections, state officials successfully asked the Supreme Court to put the lower court decision on hold in May. ... In the latest case, the state's Republican leadership has unlikely allies in the form of the civil rights plaintiffs who originally sued to ensure a second majority Black district.
Louisiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguiñaga wrote in court papers that the state is "stuck in an endless game of ping-pong" that needs to be resolved. If not, "the state will be sued again no matter what it does," he added. ... The state argues in part that it should have leeway to draw districts on partisan grounds to protect incumbents, which include House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican.
{snip}
Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-takes-louisiana-racial-gerrymandering-dispute-rcna175596
Hat tip, the CBS radio news at 11:00 a.m.
= new reply since forum marked as read
His wife was certainly involved. Does anyone really believe that he wasn’t?
Alito is suspicious as hell too (as is his wife), he’s a vicious right-wing Culture Warrior who is on record as saying “only one side in America can win”, not to mention the fact that he authored the Dobbs opinion. Plus he and Thomas are utterly shameless in receiving gifts and favors from right-wing billionaires with business before the Court. In this, they are every bit as venal and corrupt as Trump and his Crime Family.
And in addition to those two, Roberts, Barrett, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch have signed on to or authored plenty of the extreme anti-democratic agenda of the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice in particular has been at the forefront of expanding presidential power—and by that I mean Republican presidential power—and granting ever more impunity to Trump in particular for his “official acts.” 
Lest we forget, several of these justices worked on behalf of George W. Bush’s successful campaign to steal the 2000 US presidential election. Though to be fair, it was the Supreme Court who really decided that outcome, with a 5-4 majority that included one Clarence Thomas.
Oh, and Usha Vance clerked for Brett Kavanaugh, who is one of three Supreme Court justices who owe their seats to Donald Trump. The other three being John “Official Acts” Roberts, and Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas—‘nuff said. Quite the rogues gallery there.
Make no mistake, these are ideologically motivated political operatives, not “impartial judges.” They were put on the Court for a reason—their membership in the Federalist Society is evidence enough. And we’ve all seen how much damage they’ve done to our democracy and our rights already. How much more are we going to tolerate?