* * *
SCOTUS Reform Needed – and Callais Decision is All About ‘Intent’
It looks to me that the Supreme Court In their Louisiana vs Callais decision last month ruled that Congressional redistricting had to be intentionally based on race to be considered a violation of the Voting Rights Act.
Without such intent, disputing such redistricting would not be possible, even to secure representation for large portions of a States’ population that would otherwise be unrepresented in Congress. Here is a summary of this decision, based on the Court's action favoring Justice Alito’s opinion:
On April 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court in Louisiana v. Callais significantly narrowed the circumstances under which a racial vote dilution challenge to a redistricting map can be made under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended (VRA). In Callais, the Court held that the State of Louisiana engaged in an "unconstitutional racial gerrymander" when it created a second majority-minority district in its congressional redistricting map to comply with Section 2. Applying standards revised in Callais, the Court determined that because Section 2 did not require the creation of the second majority-minority district, there was no compelling governmental interest that justified the state's use of racial considerations in creating the map. In so ruling, the Court held that Section 2 is violated "only when the evidence supports a strong inference that the State intentionally drew its districts to afford minority voters less opportunity because of their race."
 |
| Justice Elena Kagan |
A dissenting opinion by Justice Kagan pointed out that: ‘The majority (6-3) essentially rewrote Section 2, requiring plaintiffs to prove intentional, race-based discrimination by the State in order to challenge redistricting. She noted that this decision made success in vote-dilution lawsuits "nearly impossible."
* *
I find it hard to believe, as Justice Alito who wrote the majority opinion appears to believe, that Louisiana had not intentionally drawn its Congressional districts to lessen voting opportunities for minority voters for racial reasons, managing to come up with other reasons to do so.
This decision might very well backfire, resulting in a massive turnout of Black voters for Democratic candidates throughout the nation, so large that it would render the Callais decision meaningless, even in traditionally Republican-dominated Congressional districts. But don’t count too heavily on that happening.
Some Southerners still have not recognized that they lost the Civil War, which was about abolishing slavery, despite politicians of both major parties behaving otherwise starting just a few years later and in many instances, continuing today.
The Constitution, in giving Supreme Court Justices lifetime terms, did not anticipate the increasing lifespan that has occurred over the years. An Amendment is needed, including both term and age limits. Justice Thomas has already served 35 years and Justice Alito has served 30 years and neither any longer reflect the nation’s ideals as inspired by the Declaration of Independence and made into law by the Constitution. The Louisiana vs Callais decision is an example.
Despite that decision though, Congress and State legislators still can control elections. Article I, Section 4, of the Constitution remains the primary source of constitutional authority to regulate elections for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. It directs and empowers States to determine the “Times, Places, and Manner” of congressional elections, subject to Congress’s authority to “make or alter” state regulations.’
So despite the Louisiana vs Callais’ decision, the battle still goes on, shifting from Federal courtrooms to the floors of Congress and State legislatures where voters can elect candidates who want to encourage, and not restrict, voting.
While the American people’s elected representatives have over the years sought to do that, addressing centuries of racial discrimination by passing voting rights legislation, the SCOTUS has been steered for nearly half a century by Chief Justices and a politically based majority that appears intent on undoing as much of that progress as possible. Undeniably, bigotry still influences many American voters who think encouraging and enabling more people to vote is not a good idea.
Course correction starts with reform via an Amendment concerning Justices’ age and term limits, along with continued voter pressure on State legislators and Congressional Representatives to clarify regulations concerning Congressional elections. That is up to the nation’s voters. You!
JL
* * *
The Lawbreaker-in-Chief
If you have any doubt about President Trump’s unbelievable breaking of laws and disregard for the Constitution, read the overwhelming evidence documented in Professor Heather Cox Richardson’s May 14 ‘Letters from an American’ posting, just click here or copy and paste https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/ on your device’s browser line.
And while you’re there, check out the May 17 posting in which Professor Richardson addressed the Sunday prayer meeting the President set up to help lock in Evangelical Christian voters. Having one Orthodox rabbi present there did not alter that purpose, clearly counter to the intent of the United States Senate in 1796 and the words of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison both of whom she also included in that posting:
“But the United States of America was not founded as a Christian nation. The Founders were quite clear about that. In the 1796 Treaty of Tripoli, ratified unanimously by the Senate just a decade after the Constitution went into effect, U.S. leaders said “the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion” and has “no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of” Muslims. They went on to say that “no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between” the U.S. and Tripoli.
Thomas Jefferson, the key author of the Declaration of Independence, and James Madison of Virginia, the key thinker behind the Constitution, both wrote explicitly about the importance of keeping the government separate from religion.
Jefferson wrote that “religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship.” “[T]he legitimate powers of government reach actions only,” he wrote, “[and] not [religious] opinions.”
In 1785, Madison explained that what was at stake in keeping the state and religion separated was not just religion, but also representative government itself. The establishment of one religion over others attacked a fundamental human right—an unalienable right—of conscience. If lawmakers could destroy the right of freedom of conscience, they could destroy all other unalienable rights, including those enumerated in the Declaration of Independence and codified in the Constitution.
Those in charge of government could throw representative government out the window and make themselves tyrants.”
* *
But Americans still managed to elect Donald Trump, poorly educated and blissfully ignorant of all of this, to the presidency in 2016 and 2024. Even now, he is still supported by Republicans who chose primary candidates he had backed in Louisiana and Indiana rather than more enlightened Republicans who had recognized his massive shortcomings.
Those who voted for him, and who vote as he recommends, must share the criticism he deserves. As I have often said, this is the Achilles Heel of American representative democracy.
It is now about five and a half months until the mid-term General elections, at which time a Democratic House and possibly a Democratic Senate can be elected with your votes.
JL
‘A Failing, Flailing President Supplicates Xi’
Copy and paste https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/why-did-trump-take-elon-musk-to-china on your device's browser line or just click here to read Paul Krugman’s May 14 column, titled above, explaining why President Trump’s visit to China was a failure, regardless of what he says.
JL
* * *
Housekeeping on Jackspotpourri
Your comments on this ‘blog’ would be appreciated. My Email address is jacklippman18@gmail.com.
Forwarding Postings: Please forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it (Friends, relatives, enemies, etc.) If you want to send someone the blog, you can just tell them to check it out by visiting https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com or you can provide a link to that address in your email to them.
There’s another, perhaps easier, method of forwarding it though! Google Blogspot, the platform on which Jackspotpourri is prepared, makes that possible. If you click on the tiny envelope with the arrow at the bottom of every posting, you will have the opportunity to list up to ten email addresses to which that blog posting will be forwarded, along with a brief comment from you. Each will receive a link to click on that will directly connect them to the blog. Either way will work, sending them the link to https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com , or clicking on the envelope at the bottom of this posting.
Email Alerts: If you are NOT receiving emails from me alerting you each time there is a new posting on Jackspotpourri, just send me your email address and we’ll see that you do. And if you are forwarding a posting to someone, you might suggest that they do the same, so they will be similarly alerted. You can pass those email addresses to me by email at jacklippman18@gmail.com
More on the Sources of Information in Jackspotpourri: The sources of information used by Jackspotpourri include a delivered local daily ‘printed’ newspaper (now the South Florida Sun Sentinel) and what appears in my daily email; that includes the views of many contributors, including the New York Times and other respected journals.
Be aware that when I open that email, I first quickly glance at and screen out those sent to my very old former email address and those considered ‘promotional’ by Gmail’s system as no more than advertisements or requests for donations.
Besides these sources, I also utilize the Google search engine where I can look up any subject I want.
Lately, these search results have been headed by a very generalized summary clearly labeled as being developed by AI (Artificial Intelligence). On occasion I might use such search results, but when I do, I will say that I am doing so. Generally, however, I try not to use such summaries in preparing Jackspotpourri.
Following such ‘AI’ search results, there follows the other results of my search. Unlike the anonymous AI-generated summaries, the sources of these results are clearly indicated, giving them a greater credibility than any AI summary.
It comes down to who YOU want to be in the driver’s seat in seeking information: yourself or something else (Artificial Intelligence), the structure of which somewhere along the way had to have been created by others, with whose identity I am neither familiar nor comfortable. At least when I read a column by Timothy Snyder, for example, I know from where it comes, and to some extent, what to expect.
Caution should be exercised in using Artificial Intelligence. Always!
JL
* * * *
No comments:
Post a Comment