The ruling, in Louisiana v. Callais, makes it easier for states to draw districts for Congress, state legislatures and local councils that elect the candidates favored by white voting blocs. The officials who make the maps no longer need to worry much about whether they are sprinkling Black voters across many districts and eliminating majority Black districts," wrote the board. "The reality is that in the name of disentangling race from politics, the Supreme Court has given white voters more power at the expense of racial minorities.""Race" is a concept invented and enforced by white people to differentiate them from “non-white” people (a term that has fluctuated over time, often applied to nationalities now accepted as “white”). Among white nationalists, “white” only means those who agree with them (“them” being very particular groups, usually). The very concept is about division. Us; them: power; without power. The Sinister Six have no interest in disentangling race from politics; politics is always about power. Even the root of “democracy” in the Greek of Attic Greece, is demo kratos, or “people power.” Politics is always about power. They’re only interested in the most American one: using race to ensure we continue to divide people, and one group enjoys power and privilege over other groups.
The Sinister Six may tell themselves they are saving democracy in America from racism, but they are only reinforcing and reinstating the racism that was here in 1776, and written into the constitution in 1789. If you don’t understand that, you’re lying to yourself as much as the majority in Callais is. This is America. You can’t disentangle race from politics. Race in America is politics. And it’s always used to wield power, over the group identified as “other.”
This is happening because the demographic shift is toward “non-white.” A shift that only really matters to whites. We know our ability to privilege ourselves depends on our power. Slaves outnumbered slaves owners in the American South before the 13th amendment, but slave owners had the power of the state behind them, right down to the Fugitive Slave Act. Losing that power, we had to impose new powers. The 15th Amendment was interpreted by the Supreme Court to allow literacy tests and poll taxes. We finally ended that with the Voting Rights Act, a law meant to implement the 15th Amendment.
And now where are we? Still imposing new powers on people we think we need to control, so we can stay in control. (And Clarence Thomas is proof the real concept of race is not skin color, but who gets to control whom.)
Warnock on SCOTUS:
— Acyn (@Acyn) April 30, 2026
First of all, no one elected this Court—to decide what kind of remedies we need in this moment. It’s really not up to the Supreme Court to say, “Well, we have reached the threshold where this issue around race and inclusion is no longer necessary.” That is not… pic.twitter.com/SNFBhjC4AX
Warnock on SCOTUS:
First of all, no one elected this Court—to decide what kind of remedies we need in this moment. It’s really not up to the Supreme Court to say, “Well, we have reached the threshold where this issue around race and inclusion is no longer necessary.” That is not the job of the Court.
And I’m struck, quite frankly, by the very easy and nonchalant way in which this extreme, activist Court knocks down precedent after precedent. The bar for doing that ought to be high, but we’re seeing with this Court—whether we’re talking about voting rights or a woman’s bodily autonomy, the right to decide with respect to her own body—they just strike down things they don’t like.
They don’t have any respect, in the ways that we expect courts traditionally to, for precedent. And when precedents are torn down, you need a darn good reason to do it—and they are an activist court.
Art III of the Constitution:Jeffries says everything is on the table legislatively to deal with the Supreme Court:
— Acyn (@Acyn) April 30, 2026
In the new Congress, we’re going to have to do something about this Supreme Court, and let me be very clear: everything is on the table. pic.twitter.com/Wa7mfqkAPO
Section 1Congress has power over even the courts. Not absolute power, but the power to make regulations and exceptions to the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Even the composition of the Court is decided by Congress. Congress has the authority it needs. It just needs to use it
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Section 2
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State,—between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.
this line from alito’s opinion, that the question before the court was “whether compliance with the Voting Rights Act should be added to our very short list of compelling interests that can justify racial discrimination,” is truly orwellianNot disentangling race from anything. Just re-establishing who gets to decide when race matters.
it is racial discrimination to try ensure that the representation of a minority group is roughly in line with its proportion of the state’s population. it is equal protection to allow a state to obliterate a minority group’s representation.
No comments:
Post a Comment