Politics North Carolina voting rights ruling offers a model of anti-racist jurisprudence

16:30  21 september  2021
16:30  21 september  2021 Source:   thehill.com

Democrats have finally identified the greatest threat to voting rights — the Supreme Court

  Democrats have finally identified the greatest threat to voting rights — the Supreme Court Speaker Pelosi plans to vote on a bill that would undo many of the Court’s attacks on democracy as soon as next week.On Tuesday, Rep. Terri Sewell (D-AL) introduced the plan, known as the “John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021,” with a strong endorsement from House leadership. The bill is expected to receive a House floor vote as soon as next week — but will likely die in the Senate, like other Democratic priorities sabotaged by a handful of Democratic senators who remain loyal to the filibuster.

Last Friday a divided, three-judge panel of the North Carolina Superior Court handed a small victory to groups determined to protect voting rights. These rights are being eroded by state laws under the deceptive label of protecting "election integrity." The court struck down North Carolina's voter identification law because it had a disproportionate impact on minority groups and would make it harder for Black people to vote.

a man holding a sign: North Carolina voting rights ruling offers a model of anti-racist jurisprudence © The Hill North Carolina voting rights ruling offers a model of anti-racist jurisprudence

In so doing, it offered an example of the important role state courts can play in an era when conservatives dominate the federal judiciary. More important, it offered a model of anti-racist jurisprudence.

Senate Democrats unveil new voting rights bill in latest effort to bring federal rules to elections

  Senate Democrats unveil new voting rights bill in latest effort to bring federal rules to elections The Freedom to Vote Act is more scaled back than previous pieces of voting rights legislation, would establish federally mandated election rules. Its future in the Senate is threatened by Republicans, who have generally opposed federal laws that govern how states run their elections. © Alex Wong, Getty Images WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 14: U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) (C), Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA) (L) and Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) (R) speak to reporters after a meeting with members of Texas House Democratic Caucus at the U.S. Capitol July 14, 2021 in Washington, DC.

The court's decision resurrected an older and often demeaned theory of discrimination and gave the lie to the United State Supreme Court's recently expressed view that voter identification requirements are nothing more than "mere inconveniences" inevitably associated with any voting scheme.

It echoed Justice Elena Kagan's argument that "racial discrimination and racially polarized voting are not ancient history. Indeed, the problem of voting discrimination has become worse ...Weaken the Voting Rights Act, and predictable consequences follow: yet a further generation of voter suppression laws."

The North Carolina voter identification law proves the accuracy of Kagan's prediction: The weakening of the Voting Rights Act has allowed voter suppression laws to flourish.

Parliamentary election unlikely to change Russia's politics

  Parliamentary election unlikely to change Russia's politics MOSCOW (AP) — After a few weeks of desultory campaigning but months of relentless official moves to shut down significant opposition, Russia is holding three days of voting this weekend in a parliamentary election that is unlikely to change the country’s political complexion. There’s no expectation that United Russia, the party devoted to President Vladimir Putin, will lose its dominance of the State Duma, the elected lower house of parliament. The main questions to be answered are whether the party will retain its current two-thirds majority that allows it to amend the constitution; whether anemic turnout will dull the party’s prestige; and whether imprisoned oppositi

Indeed, the Supreme Court has provided what The New Republic's Matt Ford calls "a blank check for Republican state lawmakers: So long as they invoke voter fraud and don't say anything too egregious, the Supreme Court will have their back."

Moreover, the court has erected procedural and evidentiary hurdles that make it harder to challenge those Republican efforts.

As law professor Jamelia Morgan explains, federal court voting rights decisions have demonstrated "increasing reluctance to accept circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent. Stated differently, these courts have declined to draw the inference that the challenged electoral policy or practice, when combined with historical and social factors, deprive minority individuals of the right to vote on account of race, and in some cases have required an evidentiary showing amounting to express discriminatory intent."

North Carolina judges strike down state’s voter ID law

  North Carolina judges strike down state’s voter ID law RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — North Carolina judges struck down the state’s latest photo voter identification law on Friday, agreeing with minority voters that Republicans rammed through rules tainted by racial bias as a way to remain in power. Two of the three trial judges declared the December 2018 law is unconstitutional, even though it was designed to implement a photo voter ID mandate added to the North Carolina Constitution in a referendum just weeks earlier. They said the law intentionally discriminates against Black voters, violating their equal protections. © Provided by Associated Press Republican Senate leader Phil Berger speaks Tuesday, Aug.

Fortunately, the North Carolina court took a different path, insisting that what it called a "sensitive inquiry into such circumstantial and direct evidence of intent" is precisely what is required in the highly charged area of voting rights.

Such an inquiry is central to anti-racist jurisprudence. That jurisprudence challenges existing laws and practices for their hidden biases about race and power and their impact on the lives of persons of color.

An anti-racist jurisprudence treats racism, following Ibram X. Kendi's definition, as "a marriage of racist policies and racist ideas that produces and normalizes racial inequities." Racial inequity, Kendi notes, occurs "when two or more racial groups are not standing on approximately equal footing." A racist policy is "any measure that produces or sustains racial inequity between racial groups."

Without citing him, the North Carolina court took up Kendi's call to focus on racial inequities and offered a convincing four-part test to assess the potential racism of the state's voter identification law.

A Democratic House May Depend on Dismantling Minority Districts

  A Democratic House May Depend on Dismantling Minority Districts As the 2022 redistricting wars heat up, multiple lawsuits could help determine the future of Congress.In 2022, she wants to dismantle it.

That test starts by highlighting "the law's historical background." It then requires examination of "the specific sequence of events leading to the law's enactment, including any departures from the normal procedural sequence, the legislative history of the decision, (and) the impact of the law and whether it bears more heavily on one race than another."

The court found that "North Carolina has a long history of race discrimination generally and race-based vote suppression in particular ... When minority citizens have gained political power in North Carolina, the party in power has moved to constrain that political participation, particularly when those minority voters, because of the way they vote, posed a challenge to the governing party at the time."

Examining the events leading up to the passage of the voter identification law, the court determined that the process used was "unusual and deviated from normal procedure." The legislature passed the law in the "immediate aftermath of a (court) decision striking down racially gerrymandered districts."

The court found that the law was enacted in what it called "a rushed process that left insufficient time to consider and redress concerns about the law's impact on minority voters."

And, as to the impact of the voter identification law, the court said that there was clear and convincing evidence that it "bears more heavily on African American voters. African American voters," it said, "are more likely to lack qualifying IDs than white voters."

Transcript: Kim Jong Un and the Northeast Asian Arms Race

  Transcript: Kim Jong Un and the Northeast Asian Arms Race Patrick Cronin: Thank you for joining Hudson Institute’s discussion today on Kim Jong-un and Arms Racing in Northeast Asia. I’m Patrick Cronin, Asia-Pacific Security Chair at Hudson, and I am delighted today to be joined by my distinguished colleague, Alex Wong, who among many other achievements recently served as the Deputy Special Representative for North Korea at the State Department. Jean Lee of the Wilson Center, a pioneer in the on-the-ground reporting inside North Korea, and Ankit Panda, the Stanton Senior Fellow in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the author of the outstanding book, Kim Jong-un and the Bomb: Survi

The court made quick work of the state's argument that the new law was necessary to protect the integrity of state elections. In fact, "it is reasonable," the court said, "to assume that a voter ID law that intentionally targets one group of voters in a discriminatory manner would reduce, rather than enhance, public confidence in election integrity."

In the end, the court held that North Carolina's voter identification law was exactly the kind of racist policy that Kendi described. It said that this law "would not have been enacted in its current form but for its tendency to discriminate against African American voters."

At a time when the Supreme Court and the federal courts have largely turned their back on the project of dismantling American racism, the North Carolina decision exemplifies the important role state courts can play in that struggle.

We have come a long way from the moment in American history when states' rights arguments were used simply to resist the federal government's attempt to end racial segregation.

As former Supreme Court Justice William Brennan once said, "Federalism need not be a mean-spirited doctrine that serves only to limit the scope of human liberty. Rather, it must necessarily be furthered significantly when state courts ... protect the people of our nation from governmental intrusions on their freedoms."

State courts now need to heed Brennan's call and stand ready to reinstate rights that the Supreme Court is eroding. North Carolina shows one way to get it done.

Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College. He is author of numerous books on America's death penalty, including "Gruesome Spectacles: Botched Executions and America's Death Penalty." Follow him on Twitter @ljstprof.

How the Christian right embraced voter suppression .
Abortion isn’t the only victory conservative evangelicals have won in 2021.For decades, the Christian-right foot soldiers who form the backbone of the Republican Party have regularly and enthusiastically showed up for legislative battles over religious freedom and reproductive and LGBTQ rights. On September 1, they scored one of their biggest victories yet: the Texas Heartbeat Act, which bans abortion after six weeks of pregnancy and deputizes private citizens to report anyone who helps a woman obtain an abortion.

usr: 0
This is interesting!