Carol Platt Liebau: The Supreme Court and a Colorblind Constitution
カートのアイテムが多すぎます
カートに追加できませんでした。
ウィッシュリストに追加できませんでした。
ほしい物リストの削除に失敗しました。
ポッドキャストのフォローに失敗しました
ポッドキャストのフォロー解除に失敗しました
Carol Platt Liebau: The Supreme Court and a Colorblind Constitution
-
ナレーター：
-
著者：
このコンテンツについて
The Supreme Court recently heard a Louisiana case with sweeping implications for how congressional districts are drawn. The issue: does Louisiana’s map amount to racial gerrymandering. And are majority-minority districts themselves constitutional?
It’s hard to argue that dividing Americans by color is anything but discriminatory. These districts were created on the assumption that white voters couldn’t – or wouldn’t – elect minority candidates or represent minority interests. That may have sounded plausible once. But in post-Obama America, that assumption doesn’t hold up.
The Roberts Court has—rightly—embraced the idea of a “Colorblind Constitution,” one that forbids the government from sorting people by race. That makes it likely the Supreme Court will strike these majority minority districts.
If so, the balance of power in Congress could shift by somewhere between nineteen and twenty-seven new Republican seats.
No wonder the left is screaming bloody murder.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.