观点美国政治

Polarisation and partisan redistricting in the US

Supreme Court ruling has deepened an already ugly battle over gerrymandering

Late last month, the US Supreme Court significantly weakened one of America’s most hallowed pieces of law: the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Justices ruled 6-3 that Louisiana should not be allowed to create a new, majority black voting district, since doing so would be discriminatory. The ruling reflected a fundamental political divide over how much progress has been made in combating racial discrimination, and what, if anything, still needs to be done to prevent it.

President Lyndon Johnson signed the act into law five months after the “Bloody Sunday” attacks on civil rights activists in Selma, Alabama. It was designed to prevent racial discrimination in voting, protecting the 14th and 15th amendments to the constitution, which preserve equal rights. It prevented things such as literacy tests for voters, or allowing federal officials to monitor state and local elections. Amended five times, it was eventually used to redistrict certain areas of the country to include more black voters.

The act was an acknowledgment of the fact that in many parts of America, particularly the Deep South, state and local statutes — the “Jim Crow” laws — purposely enforced segregation and disenfranchisement of Black Americans. It was also a tacit acknowledgment that voting often broke down along racial lines. Districts without a critical mass of Black voters were unlikely to get any Black candidates.

您已阅读38%(1394字),剩余62%(2265字)包含更多重要信息,订阅以继续探索完整内容,并享受更多专属服务。
版权声明:本文版权归manbetx20客户端下载 所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×