How would the VRA's redistricting implications play out with more minorities?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 05:15:24 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Constitution and Law (Moderator: World politics is up Schmitt creek)
  How would the VRA's redistricting implications play out with more minorities?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: How would the VRA's redistricting implications play out with more minorities?  (Read 1621 times)
Nichlemn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,920


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: July 08, 2011, 05:52:32 AM »

Suppose the US remained majority non-Hispanic white, but some states had a consistent majority of their voters as minorities. For example, suppose Mississippi's racial demographics were inverted, so blacks were now a majority and all four Congressional districts could compactly be drawn as majority-black. Would the VRA imply that they must be drawn this way? Or alternatively, if a compact white majority district could be drawn - given that whites are now a numerical minority within the state, would the VRA imply that that district must be created?

Would either of these answers change if the US as a whole was plurality non-Hispanic white instead? Plurality Hispanic? Plurality black? Majority black?


 
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,711
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: July 08, 2011, 02:49:51 PM »

That's a good question.

I have no idea.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: July 08, 2011, 02:54:15 PM »

Whites are not a protected minority under the VRA. As to how Mississippi would have to be drawn... depends on communities of interest under the Gingles test. Tongue
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: July 18, 2011, 11:52:30 AM »

Whites are not a protected minority under the VRA. As to how Mississippi would have to be drawn... depends on communities of interest under the Gingles test. Tongue

A state has no obligation to draw more VRA section 2 districts than would be required to achieve a rough proportionality compared to the voting age population (Johnson v De Grandy- 1994). If MS were 55% black, the state could draw only 2 black-majority districts and not be in violation of the VRA.
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,711
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2011, 01:32:05 PM »

Whites are not a protected minority under the VRA. As to how Mississippi would have to be drawn... depends on communities of interest under the Gingles test. Tongue

If this is true, that the VRA doesn't protect Whites, couldn't it face a possible legal challenge based on the "equal protection clause" of the 14th Amendment?  The Constitution is colorblind.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: July 22, 2011, 08:27:19 AM »

Whites are not a protected minority under the VRA. As to how Mississippi would have to be drawn... depends on communities of interest under the Gingles test. Tongue

If this is true, that the VRA doesn't protect Whites, couldn't it face a possible legal challenge based on the "equal protection clause" of the 14th Amendment?  The Constitution is colorblind.

Indeed, that seems pretty unfair. Still won't happen, though.
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,711
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: July 22, 2011, 10:24:30 AM »

Whites are not a protected minority under the VRA. As to how Mississippi would have to be drawn... depends on communities of interest under the Gingles test. Tongue

If this is true, that the VRA doesn't protect Whites, couldn't it face a possible legal challenge based on the "equal protection clause" of the 14th Amendment?  The Constitution is colorblind.

Indeed, that seems pretty unfair. Still won't happen, though.

What makes you say that?
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: July 22, 2011, 11:53:55 AM »

Whites are not a protected minority under the VRA. As to how Mississippi would have to be drawn... depends on communities of interest under the Gingles test. Tongue

If this is true, that the VRA doesn't protect Whites, couldn't it face a possible legal challenge based on the "equal protection clause" of the 14th Amendment?  The Constitution is colorblind.
The VRA's constitutionality is tested many times - and yeah, it remains contentious in legal circles, and it is likely that it will one day be struck. Though probably not without some kind of major demonstration that it is no longer  necessary.

e.g. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/22/AR2009062200771.html
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: July 23, 2011, 11:15:06 AM »

Whites are not a protected minority under the VRA. As to how Mississippi would have to be drawn... depends on communities of interest under the Gingles test. Tongue

If this is true, that the VRA doesn't protect Whites, couldn't it face a possible legal challenge based on the "equal protection clause" of the 14th Amendment?  The Constitution is colorblind.
The VRA's constitutionality is tested many times - and yeah, it remains contentious in legal circles, and it is likely that it will one day be struck. Though probably not without some kind of major demonstration that it is no longer  necessary.

e.g. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/22/AR2009062200771.html

The contentious part is section 5 that requires certain jurisdictions to be "precleared". That was the subject of the suit in the article. As the opinion noted, it's based on old data and old voting patterns.

Section two applies to all states equally, and with the Gingles test it automatically can take new voting behavior and demographics into account. I don't think many observers find that part as troublesome.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: July 26, 2011, 10:29:40 AM »

The Gingles test is basically case law that says the law effectively self-annuls if conditions change. Makes you wonder why the Act still needs renewing by Congress. Grin
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 12 queries.