Supreme Court Justices Debate 'Race-Based' Districts and Voting Rights Act

Section Two of the Voting Rights Act

• 🎯 The Supreme Court heard arguments in cases that could impact Section Two of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, concerning 'race-based' districts.
• 💡 Plaintiffs argue that states must ensure an equally open electoral process, and that racially polarized voting, evidenced by the inability of Black candidates to win statewide in Louisiana, shows race plays an outsized role.

The Role of Race in Districting

• ⚖️ Justice Kavanaugh questioned the duration of race-based remedies, asking about the proper size or percentage for race's role and suggesting remedies should not be indefinite.
• 🧠 The Court has acknowledged an awareness of race in districting but distinguishes between general awareness and race being the motivating factor, which triggers strict scrutiny.
• ⚠️ A white block vote that overrides the politically cohesive vote of Black voters can constitute a prima facie case of vote dilution.

Durational Limits and Remedies

• 📜 The attorney argued that while race-based remedies can and should have time limits, the statute itself should not dissolve simply because race is an element of the remedy.
• 🏛️ Congress was clear in not including a durational limit in Section Two, unlike in Section Five of the Voting Rights Act, suggesting a permanent right to protection.
• 🧩 The distinction was made between a statute and its application, with the argument that court-ordered remedies have time limits, but the underlying statute's protection against race discrimination should not be indefinite without Congressional action.