Supreme Court guts Voting Rights Act in Louisiana redistricting ruling

For those of us who grew up during the Civil Rights era, there are some ugly memories.

In 1965, “Bloody Sunday” occurred on Alabama’s Edmund Pettus Bridge, when soldiers brutally attacked Black protesters.

These marchers, led by John Lewis, were met with tear gas and whips as they demanded the right to vote.

Two days later, Martin Luther King Jr. organized a smaller march towards the bridge; Here demonstrators prayed and turned back to prevent further violence.

SUPREME COURT BASIC VOTING RIGHTS ACT RULES AS REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS STARTED THE REDISTRIBUTION BATTLE

There was a sit-in at the White House, a protest at the Capitol, and the Watts riots in Los Angeles that summer.

Two years ago, Bull Connor of Alabama turned tornadoes powerful enough to knock down protesters, including children, and cause injuries.

All of this led LBJ to sign the Voting Rights Act, passed by Congress, with strong support from Republicans as well as Democrats, outlawing racial discrimination in voting.

DESANTIS’ REDISTRUCTION FIGHT RECEIVES GREAT SUPPORT FROM GOP’S POTENTIAL SUCCESSOR: ‘WE ARE DOING THE RIGHT THING’

And now it’s nearly dead, thanks to the Supreme Court.

I’m the first to admit that a lot has changed in the last sixty years. We had a Black president elected for two terms. Most major cities had one or more Black mayors. There were Black governors, dozens of Black members of Congress, and a Black vice president.

Now the court claims that the voting law is a victim of its own success.

The John Roberts court has a distinct ability to overturn laws that have governed the country for decades. (Shawn Thew-Pool/Getty Images)

In a crude display of ideological strength, all six conservative justices voted to gut the law, while three liberal members vehemently opposed it.

Meanwhile, in 1965, newsrooms were almost entirely white, and the LA Times faced the embarrassing situation of having to send a black salesman to Watts. We now have black news anchors, newspaper editors, and news department heads, but that has brought its own battles over affirmative action.

The John Roberts court specialized in overturning laws that had governed the country since the turn of the last century. Roe v. Wade comes to mind.

In Samuel Alito’s view, he says, it’s perfectly fine for states to engage in gerrymandering to protect incumbents or favor a political party, as long as it doesn’t involve race.

Voting law is violated only when “the circumstances give rise to a strong inference that intentional discrimination has occurred.”

In the current Louisiana case, the court ruled that the state violated the Constitution by creating a second majority-black district.

JUDGES SAY THEY WILL REDRAW THE LOUISIANA CONGRESS MAP IF LAWS CANNOT DO IT.

Wall Street Journal editorial page welcomed the decision: “The Voting Rights Act was a watershed of American freedom that helped overthrow Jim Crow. But this legendary goal has been distorted over the years by both parties to justify the gerrymandering of race.”

Supporters say the creation of majority-Black districts actually ghettoizes Black lawmakers, many of whom are aging out in those safe seats.

This issue of intent was an issue that arose when I was covering the Justice Department during the Reagan administration. And the supreme court has been chipping away at the law ever since.

Samuel Alito’s opinion suggests that gerrymandering to favor incumbents or a particular party is permissible as long as it does not involve race. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The New York Times reported critics “expect that any realignment would not only endanger Black incumbents, some of whom have been in office for decades, but also threaten the rising generation of Black Democrats in the South, who already have few paths to advance in politics.”

SUBSCRIBE TO HOWIE’S MEDIA BUZZMETER PODCAST, A RIFF OF THE TODAY’S TOP STORIES

The conservative court has moved hard to the right on other race-related issues, such as rejecting affirmative action in college admissions in 2023, saying race cannot be considered a “plus” factor for applicants.

Alito argues that Black voters now participate in elections at rates similar to others. Presto, problem solved!

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD FOX NEWS APPLICATION

The SCOTUS ruling on voting rights leaves the door ajar without slamming it, leaving a gray area; which means the challenges will undoubtedly come back to judgment – ​​without much chance of success.