A recent ruling by the supreme court has stirred up a lot of controversy. That’s not really surprising these days. What with all the social media today everyone becomes immediately concerned with the court. I just smile about that as I remember a time when most folks had no clue about what the court was hearing, what cases where before it, and there was little concern except by those involved with the case. Yes outside of civics class or studying the law, generally speaking, few where a bit concerned.

This ruling concerned the voting rights act of 1965. The state of Louisiana had drawn up new districting maps, a practice that used to take place about every ten years or so but in more recent years quite a bit more frequently. Gerrymandering is what it is called when those maps are drawn up and the perception is it was done to favor one political party over the other. That map was challenged and the court ruled it unconstitutional because it was based on race. That is where the controversy stems from. Those opposing the ruling claiming the ruling is race based! The accusation being the conservatives on the court don’t want black people to vote! The court is discriminating!

I’m not pretending to know all about the voting rights act of 1965, nor completely understanding how the whole district map thing works. I’ve read a bit about it and know it is based on population density. The stated intent of redistricting is to provide equal representation of voters, the concept is similar to the electoral college. The voting rights act of 1965 was to ensure that equal representation regardless of race. The court ruled that the map, as drawn up by the Louisiana legislator, was race based. In the courts opinion there isn’t enough evidence of racial disparity to justify the use of race in determining those district maps. Limiting the use of race conscious redistricting.

So here’s my take on all of that. The Louisiana legislature drew up two new congressional district maps based on the demographics of a recent census. These maps would give the Democrats two new seats in congress and the republicans protested those maps. The court determined the maps were only drawn up to favor the Democrats whose base has historically been blacks. Nothing discriminatory about that statement, it is just a statistical fact. As usual though, whenever anything involving blacks/minorities doesn’t go the way they want, discrimination is claimed. The court has just said, discrimination works two ways. You can’t use race alone to redraw districts! That is, in and of itself discriminating.

No one is being excluded from voting. The problem is in representation. That is accomplished through the process we call gerrymandering. When those maps are drawn to favor one political party over the other. The process of redrawing the maps was primarily based on the ten year census. With the advent of the internet, computers and modern technology a great deal more data is being gathered. This data is used to define the “residents” of the district. In short, what their political leanings may or may not be. It’s the same thing as marketing! As a result, these maps are now being revised more frequently, and with more intent to favor those currently in power.

For me, with my limited understanding of how all this actually takes place, as I said I’m no expert on any of this, it comes down to one thing. It’s the “he said, she said” thing. That is what the court is saying in my opinion. The court says. ” proof of intentional discrimination” is the basis for declaring those maps in Louisiana unconstitutional. That’s their opinion.

No surprise that those opposed, those claiming they are being discriminated against don’t agree. I’m just amused by so many pretending they understand the whole process, and that they are concerned about that. Ah, the internet certainly has created a lot of experts in every field imaginable. Civic engagement? I don’t think so, it will soon be forgotten when the internet tells us all what to be upset about next. Wasn’t long ago we were tearing down statues and insisting everyone wear a mask. The civil rights act of 1965 hasn’t been gutted. It is being enforced, that’s my opinion.