Author Topic: A court challenge to California's racial gerrymandering mandate  (Read 501 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Elderberry

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,544
Washington Examiner by Edward Blum April 10, 2020

With the nation's attention elsewhere, the U.S. Supreme Court was petitioned recently to take up Higginson v. Becerra, a case that challenges the constitutionality of the California Voting Rights Act.

If the justices accept the case and declare it unconstitutional, as they should, hundreds of California cities, school districts, and other jurisdictions that have been forced to adopt racially gerrymandered, single-member election districts during the last few years may choose to restore their previous nonracial forms of governance.

This is an important case, not only for Californians, but for the rest of the nation. In striking down the constitutionality of the CVRA, the court could restore the need for local California elected officials to build bridges between racial groups and represent the needs of their entire community, rather than a single racial or ethnic faction. It would represent an important victory in the endless battle against identity politics in California and throughout the country.

This case goes back to 2002, when California's legislature, dissatisfied with a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that narrowed the use of race and ethnicity in creating election districts, passed the CVRA. The law essentially overturned the high court’s opinion, making it easier for racial and ethnic minorities to sue and demand racially gerrymandered voting districts.

More: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/a-court-challenge-to-californias-racial-gerrymandering-mandate