cases of the new term. It's about the role of race in drawing congressional
maps. John Yang has the story
to the specific question. At issue is whether Alabama's congressional
map violates what's left of the Voting Rights Act, a provision barring
discriminatory practices or procedures.
Lisa Desjardin starts us off with an explanation of what it steak.
Happening in Detroit and around Atlanta. Change in political capitals
like Tallahassee and cultural ones, like New Orleans' think that
there will be fewer majority minority districts after this election
cycle. Election law expert for Anita Tolson sees some red states
with growing black population limiting black districts as they passed
new voting laws. You have to think about how all of these things
are working together to, um, push us towards a reality in which minority
Minority voters are
Unrepresented in our system, and that's definitely a problem in Florida.
Currently, four congressional districts have majority or otherwise
favor black voting populations. But the new maps cut that in half
down to two black center districts, a seat in the north that some
conservatives saw as gerrymandered for blacks was erased. In North
Carolina, the state's primary African American district in the Northeast
Black belt was redrawn and blacks are no longer the largest voting
group, Other example.
Polls. Purple State, Michigan will move from two majority black districts
to none that from population loss, But in Georgia, blacks are a third
of the population and growing
And still will lose two majority districts. For others. It's a question
of proportion. Alabama is a quarter black Louisiana a third. Both
have just one majority. Black District critics took those maps to
the Supreme Court, which is looking at Alabama's first It's a case
by case basis.
Where you have to look at the actual facts of each situation.
Cough. Ski is the senior legal fellow at the Conservative Heritage
Foundation, he says, underneath years of complicated Supreme Court
rulings, a bottom line for the right is that race can be a factor
in drawing maps, but it should be a minimal factor. What's more important
Is compactness, keeping political subdivisions, towns, Cities counties
together. I think that's ignoring centuries of oppression that's
been systemic in Louisiana. Dillard University student Marisa Pittman
is part of a student movement, which sees current maps as part of
an erosion of rights. There are a few students have talked to who
have just decided they will not be staying in Louisiana after they
graduate due to this issue.
And they're also
Students who see this as the final straw future and Louisiana's are
both on hold, waiting for the Supreme Court to decide what could
be a landmark case over Alabama Redistricting and the politics of
race in America for the PBS news hour. I'm Lisa to garden to help
us unpack. Today's oral arguments are regular expert on all things.
Supreme Court martial coil, chief Washington correspondent for the
last National Law Journal.
Marcia, you were in the courtroom today. Right off the top. Justice
Elena Kagan said that as far as she was concerned, this case was
a slam dunk in favor of a second majority Black district and against
Alabama. Let's take a listen to part of what she said. You're looking
at a state where 27% 7% of the population is African American, but
only one of seven districts where there is a long history of racial
discrimination in the state.
At the time. Technically, she was talking to the Alabama solicitor
general. But was that her intended audience? I think partly I I think
she was really also talking to her colleagues. She had, uh noted
back in February, the Supreme Court five of the six conservative
justices, not including the chief justice had voted to allow Alabama's
map to go into effect for the 2022 elections, even though a three
judge District court
Which included two Trump appointees had found that it likely violated
the Voting Rights Act and had ordered Alabama to go back to the drawing
board and could produce a map for a second district in time for the
2022 midterms. She wrote a dissent there and very sharply accused
the court. Really of sending a message without briefing oral argument
or written opinions that the law was going to change. So I think
she was very much talking to the court and also
So she was pressing the Alabama lawyer by saying, You know, the the
three judges on the District Court said This was an easy case. Why
are we here?
And talk about sending messages. Justice Catania Brown Jackson also
seemed to be sending some messages today. The Alabama lawyer was
saying that basically his his broadest argument was that
Redistricting should be race neutral race shouldn't be considered
because when race is considered, he said, you end up with maps like
his opponents produced, which were racial gerrymanders and Alabama,
he argued, had produced a race neutral map. But he also said that
he considered racing be violating the 14th amendment. But judge this
Jackson said, Well, you know, I've researched the Constitution. I've
studied what the framers thought and what they read and I looked
at the amendments post reconstruction.
Like the 14th 15th amendments.
And it's very clear that they were trying to bring equality to black
Americans had been treated unfairly, which is exactly what Section
two is doing, she said. So the Constitution is not color blind, and
I think that was either direct or indirect message to justices like
Justice Thomas, who argued consistently in almost every race case
that the Constitution is color blind. There was also a lot of discussion
today about the intent of deluding, uh
Minority voting power.
And the effect of it, So let's take a listen to what two of the justices
had to say. Justice Jackson and Justice Samuel Alito.
You have enough people who are in, you know, marginalized groups
that another district is possible. People are being segregated in
effect in effect As justice, Kagan pointed out, right, we're not
talking about intent. We're talking about the effect. Forget about
intent. What are the results? When you do a computer simulation that
takes into account all race neutral?
Districting factors that this is a computer. It doesn't have any
intent. The result is that you don't get
The second minority majority Minority district. Why is that distinction
so important? Well, first of all, it appeared as Justice. Kagan pointed
out earlier that the Alabama lawyer said in his brief to the Supreme
Court that he she characterized it as intent is all over it. And
many years ago, the Supreme Court did say you had to prove discriminatory
intent in order to make a section to claim that Congress reversed
that and made it very clear that you do.
Not have to prove intentional discrimination, which, by the way is
extremely difficult to prove. Instead, Congress said, You have to
show a discriminatory results or a discriminatory effect of the voting
practices being challenged. And so I think that, uh, Justice Jackson
was pointing out. You know here is what we have on the ground. We
have discriminatory results and
Any argument you make for intent just isn't relevant because intent
is not required. There was also it seemed a lot of skepticism from
all sides for some of the more extreme positions that the Alabama
lawyer was taking. Let's take a listen to a question posed to the
Alabama lawyer by Chief Justice John Roberts.
What exactly is your submission and why your argument is not an effort
to resuscitate the intent test that Congress is rejected under Section
two
is actually a lot of confusion about and I don't know how serious
the confusion is. But from the questions they seem to feel the Alabama
lawyer was not really being very clear on exactly what he wanted
the court to do here. What was his argument? As Justice, Kagan pointed
out, it seemed to be he was arguing. You have to
Have intentional discrimination. So the chief justice finally, after
all the questions about what are you arguing here? Put it to him.
What do you What do you want? What are you arguing and so again,
he stressed, the lawyer stressed.
A race neutral plan only consider traditional redistricting principles
eliminate race. But he also, uh, was pressed by several lawyers.
Several justices for Isn't there a narrower approach here? I'd say
justice is, uh, Amy, Coney Barrett, Justice Kavanaugh and even the
chief justice. To a certain extent, we're looking for a narrower
approach than no race at all. Maybe, they said, we should be focusing
on one of those redistricting principles like
Compactness is what does this district look like? And is it shaped
right? Or is it one of these crazily shaped districts like a dragon
or a snake? So I think several are looking for a narrower approach.
I don't think that would satisfy the justices on the left. As justice,
Kagan pointed out very markedly, she said. The Voting Rights Act,
which she called the greatest achievement of American democracy,
had not fared well in this court, and she pointed to
Recent decisions where the court had pretty much gutted One section
and narrowed the reaches section two already
Very own. Chief Justice Marshall Coil. Thank you very much. Thank