(no subject)

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Several news reports described a collective gasp in the court when Justice Scalia made his statement. Rachel Maddow's coverage (she was in the court for the oral arguments) and shows a clip from President Johnson's speech proposing the Voting Rights Act. In that speech, Johnson cited specific examples of voter repression, some of which should sound familiar since they're STILL occurring.

Comments

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

The big difference, though, is that in the first instance, the Court used its power to make our country more inclusive, and now Scalia would have the Court use this power to render us vulnerable to regress. Even in current times, we are familiar with state governments working to suppress the votes of minorities, always being over-zealous, for instance, in clearing the rolls of felons and getting a lot of innocent minorities erased from the rolls. We don't need to make these efforts easier for them. The Republicans need to win honestly.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

But racially motivated districts, for example, is not "progress" regardless of who it benefits. Your claims of voter suppression are not minority-targeted, thankfully, and would not be stopped as such by the courts.