We’ve got to be honest: When we dug into the Supreme Court ruling in Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP — the case that upheld the state’s brazen racial gerrymander — we were shocked. That's because the ruling rolls out the red carpet for gerrymandering. The Court’s decision to uphold racial gerrymandering is exactly why we need to keep the fight for fair maps — and the NDRC — going strong. Can you rush a donation to fuel our important work so we can continue to push back against attacks on our democracy? Now, allow us, if you will, to get into some of the “meat and potatoes” of these opinions in Alexander. Samuel Alito’s majority opinion cited research on voter turnout by race — but the organization that actually did that research, the Brennan Center, later pointed out that he drew the completely wrong conclusion from it. And Clarence Thomas’ concurrence was, unsurprisingly, even more dangerously radical than the ruling. He said federal courts shouldn’t play ANY role in stopping racial gerrymandering, and he even argued that the judiciary had set bad precedents on this front by enforcing school desegregation after Brown v. Board opinion.… MAKE IT MAKE SENSE! Reading in between the lines, the ruling is part of an ongoing assault on voting rights and our democracy. Now it’s our job to balance the scales — so racial gerrymandering can’t silence voters of color and map manipulators can’t tilt elections in their favor.
Thank you for standing with us — and with democracy. — The NDRC Team
| |||||||||||||
|