- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Supreme Court has ruled two black majority districts in Louisiana.
Posted on 5/15/24 at 5:35 pm to Turbeauxdog
Posted on 5/15/24 at 5:35 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
That's not how it works, lol.
To be technical, he forgot to say it's a Congressional Act authorized by the Constitution (15A)
quote:
Amendment XV
Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Section 2.
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
The VRA has a Preamble of [An] “act to enforce the fifteenth amendment to the Constitution”
3
Posted on 5/15/24 at 5:41 pm to Tvilletiger
This is such fricking bullshite. frick this Supreme Court.
Yeah, the state is 30% black, but they’re spread out across the state and not concentrated in any one area, so why do we need to gerrymander a fricking district that stretches across the state to appease them.
Yeah, the state is 30% black, but they’re spread out across the state and not concentrated in any one area, so why do we need to gerrymander a fricking district that stretches across the state to appease them.
This post was edited on 5/15/24 at 5:58 pm
Posted on 5/15/24 at 5:44 pm to choupiquesushi
quote:
Gerrymandering is wrong no matter how u slice it., they should challenge the original law
Alan Seabaugh, a Senator from the Shreveport/Bossier area, challenged the manner in which the district was drawn.
You clearly don't get power dynamics and how Jeff Landry (and other House and Senate Republicans) was willing to give Garrett Graves the axe if it meant being able to get control of the governor's mansion without having to go to a runoff.
This post was edited on 5/15/24 at 6:07 pm
Posted on 5/15/24 at 6:04 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:majority minority districts have nothing to do with not restricting the right to vote.
The VRA has a Preamble of [An] “act to enforce the fifteenth amendment to the Constitution”
Posted on 5/15/24 at 6:31 pm to Triggerr
quote:
Clearly Cleo fields has some extremely compromising pictures of Jeff Landry. This makes no sense at all. This will have major local and national impact
As someone above pointed out, the Governor likely made a pre-election deal with Fields, which also ensured lower than usual black voter turnout by Cleo and Company not getting the buses running to the extent they’re known to do.
Also, retribution towards Garrett Graves for daring to not get fully on board the Landry for Governor campaign.
Those two issues were the most important by far in drawing the new map. Other stuff was minor.
I’m sure Graves not supporting Scalise for House Speaker also played into this. It made the rest of the Louisiana Congressional delegation, especially the Republicans, care much less about helping preserve a district he could win re-election in.
If you remember back to the last time districts were redrawn, Vitter and his team tried to back a map that would have given Landry a better chance of beating Boustany in a race, as their districts were being merged one way or another. It didn’t pass the Legislature, and Landry was forced to run against Boustany in a district that was much more favorable for Sir Charles.
Weird how tables turn.
This post was edited on 5/15/24 at 6:37 pm
Posted on 5/15/24 at 6:48 pm to deeprig9
quote:
It's constitutional because congress passed it, the president signed it, it is law.
Congress passing bills and the president signing them into law does not automatically make them constitutional.
Posted on 5/15/24 at 6:50 pm to bhtigerfan
quote:
This is such fricking bullshite. frick this Supreme Court.
I don't think this is permanent. Their objection was the timing in relation to the November election. This issue may get revisited afterwards.
Posted on 5/15/24 at 6:50 pm to Tvilletiger
How is this any better, you should never have a district basically cutting through another district.
Posted on 5/15/24 at 6:56 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The VRA has a Preamble of [An] “act to enforce the fifteenth amendment to the Constitution”
quote:
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Explain to me how guaranteeing a certain amount of districts have a certain amount of black people in any way hampers or hastens a persons ability to vote in whatever district they belong to.
Please do so without being moronic.
But also, my point was Congress passing a bill and the president signing has little to do with its constitutional review.
Posted on 5/15/24 at 7:16 pm to AubieinNC2009
That bullshite is not representative government.
The only thing people in this district near Shreveport and in North Baton Rouge have in common is skin color.
The notion that black people must be represented in government by black people is divisive and incredibly stupid.
The only thing people in this district near Shreveport and in North Baton Rouge have in common is skin color.
The notion that black people must be represented in government by black people is divisive and incredibly stupid.
Posted on 5/15/24 at 7:25 pm to Tchefuncte Tiger
quote:
Congress passing bills and the president signing them into law does not automatically make them constitutional.
I know this, but it makes the legal argument much harder to overturn at the SCOTUS level. Roe was overturned because it wasn't actual law. It was case law.
Posted on 5/15/24 at 7:29 pm to Indefatigable
And what happens if Graves gets re-elected? Do they redraw it again?
Posted on 5/15/24 at 7:34 pm to Indefatigable
I’m sure Landry guzzler Jeff Sadow is going to write some blog post about how this is a great win for Louisiana and the right thing, only because it’s what the Administration wanted.
Posted on 5/15/24 at 7:50 pm to Tvilletiger
quote:
Supreme Court has ruled two black majority districts in Louisiana.
Like so many threads on SCOTUS rulings on this board this one makes my head hurt. All the order does is stay the order of US Dist Ct for the W Dist of LA until the docketing of the appeal with SCOTUS. The 6-3 vote had all the "conservative" justices in the affirmative.
This case turns on the Purcell Principle which prevents changes to election law too close to an election. Like much of case law Purcell v Gonzales leaves the timing ambiguous and up for debate.
Posted on 5/15/24 at 7:53 pm to Tvilletiger
Why is it necessary to create districts by race? This is a color-blind country. Why is skin pigmentation part of the formula?
Why?
Why?
Posted on 5/15/24 at 8:09 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
Like so many threads on SCOTUS rulings on this board this one makes my head hurt. All the order does is stay the order of US Dist Ct for the W Dist of LA until the docketing of the appeal with SCOTUS. The 6-3 vote had all the "conservative" justices in the affirmative.
This case turns on the Purcell Principle which prevents changes to election law too close to an election. Like much of case law Purcell v Gonzales leaves the timing ambiguous and up for debate.
Is it likely that this appeal won't be heard until after the election??
Posted on 5/15/24 at 8:23 pm to Tvilletiger
Based on the racial demographics, 2 minority districts is about right. 1 is definitely low when the state is 33% black.
Posted on 5/15/24 at 8:30 pm to ShermanTxTiger
quote:
Based on the racial demographics, 2 minority districts is about right. 1 is definitely low when the state is 33% black.
The problem is that the black population is so spread out across the state that you can't create a 2nd district without some serious racial gerrymandering. If it were concentrated in just two areas, there wouldn't be an issue (other than gerrymandering by race being unconstitutional already (see: Miller v Johnson)).
Posted on 5/15/24 at 8:40 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
quote:
Amendment XV
Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Section 2.
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
The VRA has a Preamble of [An] “act to enforce the fifteenth amendment to the Constitution”
No voter has ever been guaranteed an outcome for their vote. They only are entitled to access to vote (presuming they meet the qualifications to do so [and race cannot be a qualification]). That's all the 15th requires/guarantees.
The VRA seeks to guarantee outcomes by using "dilution of voting power" as the test.
This
Is
Unconstitutional
Regardless
Of
The
VRA
Preamble
And, if "dilution of voting power" is a correct application of the 15th, then by racially gerrymandering districts, they are diluting the voting power of whites (i.e., on the basis of their race).
Posted on 5/15/24 at 8:42 pm to Tvilletiger
quote:
Who does this effect? Is anybody out of a job possibly?
I am not located in Louisiana. But if you do not know that answer you have a lot to learn.
Blacks will eventually get fricked. Illegals about to get stacked.
Signed, by your democratic party.
This post was edited on 5/15/24 at 8:44 pm
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News