Alito: “They provided no direct evidence of a racial gerrymander, and their circumstantial evidence is very weak.”the 1st Congressional District “was an unlawful gerrymander” because the Republicans “shifted about 30,000 Black voters from Charleston County over to the state’s 6th Congressional District, which became more solidly Democratic than it was before.”South Carolina already held its presidential primary.
All 170 seats in the South Carolina state legislature — 124 in the House and 46 in the Senate — are also up for grabs this year. But, not every race features a contested primary. Justice Clarence Thomas sided with the majority, but did not agree with Part III-C. Thomas does not think SCOTUS has the power to decide the two claims listed in that part: a “racially-gerrymandering” claim and a “vote dilution” claim.. “There are no judicially manageable standards for resolving claims about districting, and, regardless, the Constitution commits those issues exclusively to the political branches.
The Court’s insistence on adjudicating these claims has led it to develop doctrines that indulge in race-based reasoning inimical to the Constitution. As we reiterated last Term, “‘ur Constitution is color-blind.’” S, 163 U. S. 537, 559 ). A colorblind Constitution does not require that racial considerations “predominate” before subjecting them to scrutiny. Nor does it tolerate groupwide judgments about the preferences and beliefs of racial minorities.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: CBCToronto - 🏆 51. / 61 Read more »
Source: BNNBloomberg - 🏆 83. / 50 Read more »
Source: HuffPostCanada - 🏆 61. / 53 Read more »
Source: timescolonist - 🏆 15. / 75 Read more »
Source: PGCitizen - 🏆 65. / 51 Read more »
Source: PGCitizen - 🏆 65. / 51 Read more »