A decade of disappointment has conditioned Black Americans and Democrats to fear voting rights rulings from the Supreme Court. In 2013, a majority vote of 5-4 invalidated a core principle of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Since then, subsequent decisions have further deteriorated the law, culminating in a 2019 ruling that federal courts have no authority to prevent partisan gerrymandering.
Therefore, it came as a shock to many when two conservative justices joined the three liberal justices of the Supreme Court in reaffirming a crucial aspect of the Voting Rights Act. Chief Justice John Roberts, known for his 2013 decision in Shelby v. Holder that stripped the government’s power to review state voting laws in advance, delivered the opinion that Alabama’s congressional map unlawfully diluted the votes of Black people by concentrating them into one majority-minority district rather than two.
This recent ruling in the case of Allen v. Milligan temporarily preserves the landmark civil rights law, which many legal experts were concerned would become useless. It also holds significant implications for the 2024 elections and control of the House of Representatives, where Republicans currently hold a slim five-seat majority.
Democrats believe that this ruling could have a domino effect on other ongoing cases, potentially prompting three southern states — Alabama, Louisiana, and Georgia — to include new majority-minority districts in their congressional maps. This development would likely result in the flipping of seats currently held by Republicans. Texas might also have to add as many as five majority-minority districts to its map. Abha Khanna, a Democratic lawyer who argued the Allen case on behalf of Black voters from Alabama, expressed hope for a swift resolution, stating that the ruling clears the path for these cases to move forward.
The possible gains from this ruling could outweigh the losses Democrats anticipate in North Carolina, where a newly conservative majority on the state supreme court is expected to redraw a congressional map favoring Republicans. Immediately after the ruling, the nonpartisan Cook Political Report adjusted its projections for the 2024 elections, shifting five House seats in favor of Democrats.
Surprisingly, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, joined Chief Justice Roberts and the Court’s three Democratic appointees — Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson — in the 5-4 decision. The ruling is remarkable not only because it contradicts the Court’s recent voting rights jurisprudence but also because last year, a majority of justices upheld the same maps that are now considered illegal. This decision potentially played a role in the Democrats losing their House majority.
Although disappointed by last year’s ruling, Khanna believes today’s victory shows that justice was not denied, but merely delayed.
Advocates for voting rights were caught off guard by the Supreme Court’s decision. Left-leaning group Take Back the Court expressed their surprise in an email with the subject line “Supreme Court Shocks Nation by Doing the Right Thing.” George Cheung, the director of a voting-rights group called More Equitable Democracy, echoed this sentiment, stating that he and many others assumed the Court would diminish, if not completely dismantle, the remaining provisions of the federal Voting Rights Act.
Contrary to expectations, the Court’s majority rejected Alabama’s attempt to reinterpret the redistricting provisions of Section 2 of the law as “race neutral,” a change that would have undermined the VRA’s original goal of protecting disenfranchised Black voters.
For Democrats, this decision provides a rare opportunity to celebrate a ruling from an institution many in the party have lost faith in. Previous decisions by the Court on voting rights, gun laws, the environment, campaign finance, and particularly abortion rights have led progressives to accuse conservative justices of prioritizing their political preferences over the law.
Khanna contends that the Court’s decision should not have come as a surprise, although it clearly did to many. She views it as a remarkable victory for the Voting Rights Act and minority voting rights, but at the same time, considers it unremarkable since it reaffirms the law as it has stood for nearly four decades.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
