How the Supreme Court ruling could reduce the representation of blacks and Latinos in the US

Brazil rises in press freedom ranking and surpasses the USA for the first time A decision by the United States Supreme Court could change, in practice, who can be elected in the country. On Wednesday (29), the court emptied one of the main instruments of the Voting Rights Act, historic legislation created to combat racial discrimination in American elections. ✅ Follow the g1 international news channel on WhatsApp The law was enacted in 1965, at the height of the civil rights movement and after episodes of violence against black protesters. The goal was to prevent states from adopting rules that made it difficult for racial minorities to vote. Over the decades, legislation has expanded the political participation of blacks and Latinos. The number of black politicians elected, for example, went from around 1,500 in 1970 to more than 10,000 today, according to experts. The law ensured that minority communities had a voice in decisions about health, education and infrastructure. In the United States, deputies are elected by electoral districts, and not by a proportional system as in Brazil. Each district chooses a representative for the Chamber. The maps that determine which cities and neighborhoods belong to a given district are periodically redrawn in a process known as “redistricting.” The definition of these limits can directly influence the outcome of the elections. It is common, however, for political groups in power to manipulate district boundaries to favor allies and harm opponents. The practice is known as gerrymandering and usually occurs in two ways: concentrating voters from one group in a few districts; divide these voters among multiple districts to reduce their political strength. In practice, this can prevent minorities from being able to elect representatives even when they form a significant part of the population. What changed Woman votes in the 2024 US presidential election at Pittsburgh Manchester school Quinn Glabicki/Reuters An excerpt from the Voting Rights Act allowed challenging electoral maps that reduced the political power of minorities. Based on this rule, states were required to create districts in which black or Latino voters had a sufficient majority to elect preferred candidates. This was the recent case of Louisiana, which now has a second district with a black majority, expanding representation in Congress. Now, however, the Supreme Court has changed this understanding. The conservative majority decided that the use of racial criteria in drawing districts could be unconstitutional and indicated that the law should only be applied when it is proven that there was intentional discrimination. This, however, is much more difficult to prove. In a dissenting opinion, Justice Elena Kagan stated that the decision creates an “almost insurmountable” barrier to proving electoral discrimination. Experts estimate that the trial opens space for changes in the political map of the United States. This is because, without the previous protection: states can redraw districts without guaranteeing minority representation; lawsuits against electoral maps tend to become more difficult; black and Latino communities could lose seats in Congress and state assemblies. The decision should impact the national political dispute. Districts with more black or Latino voters tend to vote for the Democratic Party, which opposes President Donald Trump. With more freedom to redraw electoral maps, state legislators, particularly in Republican-controlled states, may try to change districts to gain advantages in minority-dominated areas. Civil rights organizations say the effects could also reach local elections, such as school boards and city councils. READ ALSO War of maps: the political battle in the USA that could strengthen or weaken Trump VIDEOS: most watched on g1

Source link