occupied
Diamond Member
- Nov 8, 2011
- 36,705
- 17,195
- 1,590
It seems Texas gained 4 million people in the last 10 years, 65% of them Hispanic, and redrew their maps to favor republicans who incidentally are not very fond of Hispanics, legal or illegal, and are involved with a host of legal challenges that threaten to further postpone their primary.
The trouble lies with the voting rights act of 1965, section 5 that requires them to clear all changes through either the Justice dept. or a special three judge panel in Washington, neither of which signed off on their map. Then some other federal judges got involved with a map of their own and it has turned into a gigantic supreme court mess who may use the opportunity to gut the voting rights act just for laughs.
Texas Voting Rights Case Heard by Supreme Court - NYTimes.com
It seems the state of Texas has not reformed enough to be trusted to redraw their districts fairly after 46 years. So what's the verdict on the board to this sorry state of affairs? Is section 5 of the voting rights act still valid or do the former Jim Crow states have the right to be as politically racist as they can get away with?
The trouble lies with the voting rights act of 1965, section 5 that requires them to clear all changes through either the Justice dept. or a special three judge panel in Washington, neither of which signed off on their map. Then some other federal judges got involved with a map of their own and it has turned into a gigantic supreme court mess who may use the opportunity to gut the voting rights act just for laughs.
Texas Voting Rights Case Heard by Supreme Court - NYTimes.com
It seems the state of Texas has not reformed enough to be trusted to redraw their districts fairly after 46 years. So what's the verdict on the board to this sorry state of affairs? Is section 5 of the voting rights act still valid or do the former Jim Crow states have the right to be as politically racist as they can get away with?