The Roberts Court v. Voting Rights, an Endless Series

Fresh off a partisan decision reading a statute with the purpose of facilitating the right to vote to permit discriminatory vote suppression by the state of Ohio, Sonny Black writes an opinion holding that the Trostskyites in the Texas state courts went too far in when it found, based on an extensive factual record, that the state’s districting was racially discriminatory:

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that one congressional district in Texas was drawn in a way that influenced the number of Hispanic and African-American voters in that district, but that three other districts in the challenged map did not violate the law.

In the case, Abbott v. Perez, the court had to decide whether to overturn a Texas state court’s decision concerning congressional and state political districts redrawn after the 2010 census.

The decision upholds Texas’ latest congressional map against challenges that said lawmakers drew the boundaries to intentionally suppress votes from minority communities

Justice Samuel Alito said in the Court’s decision that a three-judge federal court “committed a fundamental legal error” when they ruled that the state’s district map based on the 2010 Census was unlawful.

Justice Sotomayor is not learning to flinch, and also adheres to Tony Soprano’s dictum that those who want respect, give respect:

This case was decided when the Electoral College threw the election to the people’s non-choice, and Donald Trump’s nominee is definitely not a crank (TM):

In conclusion, elections are best viewed as exercises in atomistic consumer gratification.

Much more important than ~takes~ about civility or “why trump won” is that the GOP has successfully entrenched itself via gerrymanders, filibusters, and the judiciary to be very insulated from public opinion. https://t.co/qiCo4ObKW0

— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) June 25, 2018