Why the US Supreme Court made this map illegal
Рет қаралды 2,295,084
Жыл бұрынAnd it could swing the 2024 elections.
Subscribe and turn on notifications 🔔 so you don't miss any videos: goo.gl/0bsAjO
In 2013, a divided Supreme Court gutted one of the major pillars of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. In the 10 years since then, the court has moved even farther to the right. So when the Voting Rights Act came before the Supreme Court again in 2022, it didn’t look good for the law. But then something completely unexpected happened: in a 5-4 decision, two of the conservative justices voted with the 3 liberal justices to preserve the Voting Rights Act. And the effects could be huge.
At stake in the case was the way that Alabama divides up its Congressional districts. Alabama has seven districts, one of which is what’s called a “majority-minority district” in which Black Americans are the majority of the population. In 2022, a group of Black voters sued the state, saying that under the law, Alabama should actually have two majority-minority districts. And the Supreme Court agreed.
The reason this matters to the rest of the country is that Alabama’s not alone - several other states in the south are now vulnerable to similar challenges that would increase the number of majority-minority districts. And especially in a region of the country where voting is racially polarized - where white people overwhelmingly vote Republican and Black people vote Democrat - this decision has the potential to flip multiple Congressional seats in the next election. And in a US House of Representatives where Republicans only hold control by a margin of 10 votes or so, that’s a big deal.
Sources and further reading:
In 2021 every state in the US with more than one Congressional district redrew them. CNN has a great tool that looks at each state’s Congressional district map before and after that redistricting, and tracks how many majority-minority districts each state has: www.cnn.com/interactive/2022/...
FiveThirtyEight has a similar tool: projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...
Many of those new district maps are under legal challenge. The Brennan Center for Justice has a really thorough roundup of every legal case underway against those maps: www.brennancenter.org/our-wor...
The Brennan Center also has a great summary of the Alabama case: www.brennancenter.org/our-wor...
A big part of the Alabama case was determining whether drawing a second majority-black district would be easy. The mathematician Moon Duchin wrote a brief report for the court that demonstrates that really succinctly: www.brennancenter.org/sites/d...
The Guardian built a cool interactive that shows the gerrymandering in Alabama really well: www.theguardian.com/law/2023/...
Naturally I recommend reading Vox.com’s Ian Millhiser breaking down the Alabama decision: www.vox.com/scotus/2023/6/8/2...
And Vox’s Christian Paz on the political implications of the case: www.vox.com/voting-rights/237...
Subscribe to our channel! goo.gl/0bsAjO
Vox.com is a news website that helps you cut through the noise and understand what's really driving the events in the headlines. Check out www.vox.com.
Watch our full video catalog: goo.gl/IZONyE
Follow Vox on Facebook: goo.gl/U2g06o
Or Twitter: goo.gl/XFrZ5H
@davebalmada Жыл бұрын
I will never understand how the US doesn’t have impartial Supreme Court judges. How can they have an alliance to a party and be a judge? Doesn’t that defeat the purpose of being a judge?
@user-kj7dl9ux5s Жыл бұрын
it does
@AV57 Жыл бұрын
It was initially a flaw in the system, but now it’s seen as a feature of the system.
@julianbruns7459 Жыл бұрын
@@AV57i thought only developers turn a bug into a feature, now politicians too?
@umbra9472 Жыл бұрын
@@julianbruns7459 politicians did it long before developers.
@namethathasntbeentakenyetm3682 Жыл бұрын
You couldn't enforce that under the current system where politicians get to choose judges.
@TheNotSoMysteriousG Жыл бұрын
Two conservative judges who actually care about conservative values and not, you know, just worshiping the Republican party? Thats… very nice actually.
@YouScareMe1 Жыл бұрын
Roberts has always been pretty center when it comes to rulings. He obviously leans right but definitely a lot less than the rest of the judges. Kavanaugh was definitely a surprise though.
@jacobgoodstone7572 Жыл бұрын
They know what is best for their country, and adhere to and defend the rules of the constitution. They don't make a decision based on their own opinions, or what others want them to do.
@Zombieslayeraj Жыл бұрын
@jacobgoodstone9674 I mean this is just factually incorrect but its nice you have hope they do what they're supposed to do.
@user-ro9md9wp3j Жыл бұрын
Boof Kavenaugh cares about something other than beer, who would’ve thought
@YouScareMe1 Жыл бұрын
@@jacobgoodstone7572 That's rarely ever the case tbh.
@Awesome_Aasim Жыл бұрын
The fact is that mathematically congressional districts are a terrible idea and we should move towards a proportional voting system.
@devinup3981 Жыл бұрын
100% we should move towards proportional representation. Anything that helps to break up the two party chokehold would be fantastic.
@Romen_2 Жыл бұрын
Proportional voting belittles smaller states, imagine you had a world election where every country could vote, literally every president would be asian because they have way more people, the usa wouldnt be big enough to do anything. So thats why you would divide the votes into points and give evry country 1 point at max so it isnt ruled by the amount of people
@abdirahmanomar384 Жыл бұрын
@@Romen_2 hence why the founding fathers decided on the electoral college over first past the post/proportional representation.
@bellathemusicaddict Жыл бұрын
@@Romen_2it shouldn’t be about the state itself though, but on the people inside that state. If a state with, say, 3 million people, has the same amount of seats in congress (or senate, not really sure as I’m from Europe) as a state with 30 million people, then those 3 million people have a lot more power. Proportional representation really is the most democratic option.
@andreasaa2000 Жыл бұрын
@@Romen_2 And that results in a 2 party system. The US system is flawed. Its simple math.
@CaptHiltz Жыл бұрын
Why do we still allow the two major parties to even redistrict the maps? You can't tell me that each state can't put together an impartial committee.
@sherrygadberryturner9527 2 ай бұрын
STATE officials draw the maps. That’s WHY who controls a state MATTERS! We have to vote out reTHUGliCONs on ALL LEVELS!
@johnquinn6564 Ай бұрын
You could probably come up with a mathamatical algoritm that generates regions based on population with an emphasis on county lines and should not have race as a factor at all.
@brucehalleran1149 Ай бұрын
Gerrymandering is as old as voting districts. If there is one thing that binds the uniparty, it is that they want control. Neither will give up the chance to be the next to rig one of these maps, so the convention remains that the state majority party of the year gets the committee chair.
@nicsuggitt176 2 күн бұрын
Look North, Elections Canada is perfect model to emulate
@thefreudiantheoryofpenisen2197 Жыл бұрын
Can we hold out hope that at least some of the judges still believe on makeing decisions based upon the law and not partisan politics?
@kenyonsgirl415 Жыл бұрын
Depends on the topic obviously
@bbastronaut4025 Жыл бұрын
Sure but then we would be acknowledging the fact that equal and fair representation has become a partisan issue which is really not a good look.
@JacksonJinn Жыл бұрын
Considering one of those was Kavanaugh, I highly doubt it. There's something at play here, and we don't know what, but I'd keep an eye on where these people go with this.
@thefreudiantheoryofpenisen2197 Жыл бұрын
@@bbastronaut4025 well what I’m saying is a hope at least equality and equity under the law hast become a partisan issue. Unfortunately it seems many do seem to think so, the Supreme Court is meant to be the most fair and unbasis institution so if they had gone to such extremes
@thefreudiantheoryofpenisen2197 Жыл бұрын
@@kenyonsgirl415 can you please expand on your point I’m unsure what u mean
@karmakazi219 Жыл бұрын
It's a sad state of affairs when people are "surprised" that 2 Supreme Court justices did the right thing.
@eugenelim11 Жыл бұрын
Actually, there were 5 Scotus who voted. But for some strange reasons, no one is surprised when the other 3 did the right thing.
@user71285 Жыл бұрын
Stop getting your news from Vox and you'll see there's plenty of decisions that the SCOTUS has made the last few years that you'd agree with.
@Ontari1 Жыл бұрын
@@eugenelim11because those 3 consistently choose to preserve civil liberties
@cact0s_ulion405 Жыл бұрын
@@eugenelim11 Not to try to give a major opinion on a subject I don't know much about, but it does quite seems like there is no surprise when the other 3 voted for something promoting equality because they are morally and legally fair
@williampennjr.4448 Жыл бұрын
@@cact0s_ulion405 You mean 6.
@cmndrkool321 Жыл бұрын
We should just give up on districts and go with good old fashioned voting.
@helenaalexandra4197 Жыл бұрын
We are a democratic republic, not a mob driven, pure democracy.
@krone5 2 ай бұрын
districts are areas apportioned from a larger area, you are still going to have to do voting, sadly the USA struggles with putting together fair districts.
@janssen18 3 күн бұрын
@@krone5 The system makes it’s possible to become president with 22% of the vote, even when the other all supported one candidate. That is just unjustifiable. This isn’t democracy.
@janssen18 3 күн бұрын
@@krone5just let every vote count the same and it’s not unfair and misrepresenting.
@fractal_sight9730 Жыл бұрын
I appreciate the fact that Vox had both district and demographic maps, and that they were overlayed. I looked for those maps for ages when the news first broke, and was frustrated I couldn’t find it. Keep up the great work!
@David_1789 10 ай бұрын
Yes, and remember, both “packing” members of a particular demographic into the same district AND “cracking” them into different districts can achieve a pre-selected effect on election outcomes.
@yegventures 10 ай бұрын
Most of the data isn't accessible unless you pay for it. Which is why you can't find these maps
@ramshacklealex7772 Жыл бұрын
I can't remember the last time I heard about a US Supreme Court ruling upholding rights rather than removing them
@zingyburger Жыл бұрын
You can still get abortions buddy
@matthewb.7172 Жыл бұрын
Every now and then toss us a pittance to maintain an illusion of non-partisanship.
@A2nthop Жыл бұрын
"We don't know why these conservative justices decided to uphold justice." Honestly the state of the GOP right now.
@kenyonsgirl415 Жыл бұрын
Right?! Shocking.
@ConradSpoke Жыл бұрын
This comment is nonsense. The last time the Supreme Court denied a Constitutionally defined right was Dred Scott in the 1850s.
@Zambonini65 Жыл бұрын
The moment you can divide the judges of the highes court into members of political parties is the moment you should realise something is going horribly wrong.
@Crydus Жыл бұрын
You'd would already think that people will find it to be a bad idea that whoever is president at the time where a judge is appointed, that it is only based on this decision and not on a democratic majority vote.
@bakertuthill3266 Жыл бұрын
You can’t divide the judges of the Supreme Court by political parties. The two major political parties in the US are the Democrats and the Republicans. This is not the same as the conservative and the liberal dichotomy shown in the video. And even this is a simplification, since there are many constitutional interpretations that any judge may fall into. And some of the justices could be considered legally moderate, which Vox doesn’t mention. The closest you can get to “dividing the judges into members of political parties” is by picking the party of the president who appointed them. But justices are not members of political parties, and are not endorsed by political parties. They are agreed upon by a long and often bitter process in the legislature to vet out bad and overly political justice appointments through debate and hopefully bipartisan agreement. What people don’t realize is that most Supreme Court cases are not split down the “party” line. In 2009 for example, almost half of Supreme Court cases were decided unanimously. So the court is not as politicized and divided as we tend to think. The only cases that we hear about are the controversial ones that get media attention. While fears that the court has become too political are legitimate concerns, people tend to blow this issue out of proportion and it leads to a lot of pointless hatred toward the generally robust institution of the Judicial Branch. (At least robust compared to any other judicial branch. But there could certainly be a better way to do things) Great video from Vox, but it makes me sad to see that people are sort of missing the point of this video and basically ignoring the implications of the way the court voted on this decision.
@Nadz203 Жыл бұрын
Your right!!! It would be far better if they didn't have to declarer which side they lean to or affiliate with, to keep everyone guessing. Less transparency in politics is good right??
@notablediscomfort 10 ай бұрын
@@CrydusYou don't want people voting on legal officials. They get too emotionally compromised and vote based on feelings instead of who is the best for the job.
@planescaped 10 ай бұрын
Apolitical people don't tend to gravitate towards the judicial branch of the government or careers in politics, lol.
@MrGrislyTooth Жыл бұрын
As somebody that lives in the sister state to Alabama I'm incredibly happy about this Supreme Court decision because there's so much of this that goes on.
@varun009 Жыл бұрын
Ahh, good old mississoury.
@dx.feelgood5825 Жыл бұрын
As someone who lives IN Alabama, I was happy to hear about it! I’ve been angry over the gerrymandering of our districts for a long. I knew they didn’t represent our population accurately
@MossEYE- Жыл бұрын
You do know that once states are liberally ran, they fall apart
@andresano4545 Жыл бұрын
@@MossEYE- The richest, most well educated and healthiest states are all run by progressives. New England, New York and California are powers in their own right among a sea of poor, backwards states run by republicans.
@radiohead2206 Жыл бұрын
@@MossEYE- you mean like California and New York Vs Alabama? 😁
@PshemekS Жыл бұрын
Drawing election districts based on the race of the people living in a certain town or village is the 1st example of something that sounds like "systemic racism" in my dictionary. Thank you for this example.
@stephenmontague6930 Жыл бұрын
Yeah, I get that, and gerrymandering has bothered me for decades, but to ask a hard, honest question - who's to say the line wasn't drawn based on dividing a political opponent's power, which, while while maybe unfair, seems less sinister, as it could have no relation to racial / racist ideology? I mean, if people in an area tend to vote for one party, and the other party has power, it's not surprising that there's some tension, lack of support, etc. no matter who's in control. It's probably a very hard thing to regulate - not that we shouldn't try our best, it's just maybe not a simple problem, which is why it's been around so long. I suspect oddly drawn maps exist in red and blue dominated states. Anyway, I wish all well, and hope all get fair representation.
@PshemekS Жыл бұрын
@@stephenmontague6930 I'm quite sure that mathematicians will be able to prepare algorithm that will divide each state to districts with roughly equal population, using only population density, and administrative borders. You can test algorithms on maps from Europe or Africa and only later use it to the USA, so even the programmer won't know the final verdict. But, there is at least one smarter and more fair system - the whole state is one district and N people who get the most votes get the electoral mandate. This will reduce the percentage of people who did not have any representation from 45-49% to roughly 5-9% (experimentally tested in Europe). Even smarter? What if there is one popular guy in a state who gets e.g. 40% of votes in a state, that has 10 mandates? I will give him the cumulated power of 4 mandates in House/Senate/Parliament/whatever. Theoretically you can allow him to share votes with his friends who were at 11th or 12th positions, so they can jump over those in 9th or 10th positions, but I will prefer to use those super popular people to reduce the number of members of parliament. You don't need many. This is also true for my country - Poland, and the European Union. The leader of the political party is telling others how to vote, so they are mostly not necessary...
@anubis8680 Жыл бұрын
Sooo how is this not Gerrymandering, redrawing lines based on race to give a greater chance for a political outcome? I get it might be trying to reverse that which was done before but, still weird. People have a tendency to “pack together” and urban sprawl could be why that district section got split. Mapping population growth over when those lines were drawn would make for a better argument, if they are trying to prove that it was a sinister thing.
@XDF745 Жыл бұрын
The proposed solution is also drawing districts based on race which shouldn't be considered at all when drawing districts.
@PshemekS Жыл бұрын
@@XDF745 This video promoted the cultivation of problems. The disagreement is only about the level of systemic racist influence in the election process. It reminds me of some socialists in Poland disputing an adequate level of labour tax. They are already sure that all workplaces should be invigilated and controlled by a state.
@sethlmcwilliams Жыл бұрын
as an alabamian, i wholeheartedly feel it’s extremely important for every citizen to hold, and maintain representation, this ruling was a great step in the right direction
@mello-by Жыл бұрын
Alabaman W
@datcyanguy7812 Жыл бұрын
Alabaman W
@heribertoruizjr.5296 Жыл бұрын
I guess the story repeat from the north Carolina history
@TheNinjafighta Жыл бұрын
Another Alabamian in Cullman and I wholeheartedly agree.
@Currywurst4444 Жыл бұрын
Americans would rather draw the most convoluted map possible than change their voting system. Not really but for example, why not make a single large district out of Alabama and choose the 7 candidates with most votes as winners?
@shadowfax8752 Жыл бұрын
As a foreigner from a third world “flawed” democracy, where the Supreme Court judges regularly go against the President/Party that appointed them and uphold the constitution and rights, I don’t understand this partisanship in the US courts. How is this normal?
@alittlebitgone Жыл бұрын
Conservatives are psychotic, corrupt, racist, evil.....
@paulblart6411 Жыл бұрын
It’s a long story
@100c0c Жыл бұрын
That's because you only consume media from the liberal side of US politics. The Supreme Court makes 'nonpartisan' decisions all the time, but you only hear news about the court when they make decisions that liberals don't like.
@therockthatlookslikeapiece419 Жыл бұрын
the supreme court was meant to be politically neutral, but it didn’t really turn out that way
@azaxz0373 Жыл бұрын
The US only has 2 parties, so it's a very "with us or against us" mentality across the whole country
@Sacrer Жыл бұрын
When Americans see a not politically divided choice: "We don't really know why these two conservative justices chose to preserve the Voting Rights Act."
@BackYardScience2000 Жыл бұрын
It's pretty bad that we are surprised that 2 justices did the right thing. What does that say about our judicial system?
@pastelthedevil2662 Жыл бұрын
I think it says more about us as a people and how we define ourselves this way. Often times, seeing the other political side as horrific villains out to destroy America, as opposed to people. Just people, out there everyday putting work towards their ideals with the limited knowledge and resources that they have available to them. Fallible and often wrong, we all stumble through the darkness of our own lack of understanding, in an ever failing attempt to shine a light for others. A sad but beautiful kind of existence that the Supreme Court reflects in its own tumultuous lifetime, which is now as it was then in some ways, wildly incorrect, damaging, wrought with dilemma, and perhaps one of the best tools we have as a people, and often used against our very interests. Perhaps then, it is in the consolidation of its power that we've most gravely misstepped, and not in its political makeup.
@realgabrielflandes 7 ай бұрын
I think it says that republicans aren’t trying to take away the rights of minorities nor are they trying to limit their right but that they are simply supporting a color blind viewpoint. Just because a person is black doesn’t mean that they will vote one way or another so i think assuming that is more racist of democrats to do.
@derekrequiem4359 4 ай бұрын
@@realgabrielflandes More Republican judges dissented than supported, but nice try though. 😂
@realgabrielflandes 4 ай бұрын
@@derekrequiem4359 nah what i said is exactly what’s going on. Colorblind approach is what MLK fought for. Republicans aren’t racist but that’s the narrative that is pushed to demonize them.
@opalishmoth8591 Жыл бұрын
When I saw the title my reaction was “oh god what did they do this time” But turns out they did their job. I am genuinely surprised.
@JHaven-lg7lj Жыл бұрын
Same, I was a little nauseated before I realised what it was anoit
@AlbertaGeek Жыл бұрын
Well, _just_ over half of them did.
@opalishmoth8591 Жыл бұрын
@@AlbertaGeek Well in the Supreme Court just over half is what counts …. Which means whether or no rights get protected come down to the opinions of one person.
@AlbertaGeek Жыл бұрын
@@opalishmoth8591 Yes, as pilots say, "Any landing you can walk away from is a good one."
@JonSmith-hk1bq Жыл бұрын
Their job would have been to point out that a statute demanding racial gerrymandering is obviously unconstitutional.
@judelarkin2883 Жыл бұрын
We need more journalism like this. Explaining things like gerrymandering rather than just saying it’s a thing and it’s bad.
@Power_to_the_people567 Жыл бұрын
@@rome13th I guess you want to stay ignorant. You can thank the constitution and those who fight for it for giving you your right to have an opinion. With the exclusion of the majority of republicans who want to take your rights away
@unhippy1 Жыл бұрын
People only complain gerrymandering and vote rigging etc is bad when it disadvantages their 'side'.....both sides are more than happy with it when its to their advantage
@Power_to_the_people567 Жыл бұрын
@@unhippy1 It is completely normal to complain about a rigged system yet feel compelled to participate in it in order to achieve progress. It is better to fight a cheater with their same tactics. The difference is, republicans are nobody’s without gerrymandering and voter suppression. Democrats and other independents don’t need to gerrymander maps and they don’t advocate for voter suppression because current Democratic candidates are more popular and supported by more people
@Autonym Жыл бұрын
Exactly, what's needed more explanations of how government systems are manipulated. Especially with two US presidential elections in recent memory where the winners had _fewer_ votes out of the population than their opponents.
@jayme3181 Жыл бұрын
This will help more 'minority' senators be elected at the expense of the overall contest-ability of other districts as the ruling only applies to cases where the minority population in concentrated. In addition, the speaker talks about how this might lead a flipping of the house, presumably on the basis that the 'black vote' is 85% democrat, but that is not a commitment set in stone.
@jonathanoneill9200 Жыл бұрын
Just make the maps based on population and review the boundaries before each election. It’s what we do in Australia and it works pretty well. Each seat (district) has a similar population. This means remote/rural areas have a much larger area, whereas inner city/metropolitan areas are smaller and more dense.
@jamesminett9717 Жыл бұрын
Yep similiar in the UK they are based on a certain population getting 1 seat. Althought they are typically only redrawn when a majority party would gain seats as a result but still better than this american system.
@riggsmarkham922 Жыл бұрын
That’s exactly what they do in the US. The problem is who gets to review the maps and how do they decide whether the maps are fair or not. A couple of years ago, the Supreme Court could have decided on some rules that would’ve banned gerrymandering, but they said that it wasn’t their business (because the court is controlled by conservatives and banning gerrymandering would’ve hurt conservatives). So they left the system how it is: a mess where the rules are different from state to state. In some states, the legislature draws the map, in some, it’s an independent body that does it. I’m pretty sure in Britain, Canada, and Australia, they have 1 independent body deciding the maps for the whole country instead of this mess.
@joshuaharper372 Жыл бұрын
One little caveat: gerrymandering doesn't just benefit "conservatives", it benefits whoever is in control and redrawing the maps. The classic conservative argument followed by the "conservative" (strict constructionist) justices is that according to the US constitution, how those maps are drawn is technically a state decision, not a national one. (I am definitely NOT in favor of gerrymandering, by the way. I think it is inherently unjust--and that goes for creating gerrymandered majority minority districts as well as any others. A proportional voting system, as some European countries use, would actually reflect the ideologies and interests of the population better than our current system, but without major constitutional revision little will change.)
@riggsmarkham922 Жыл бұрын
@@joshuaharper372 In the United States, gerrymandering benefits conservatives because the Republican Party has simply gerrymandered more seats in their favor than the Democrats have. This is partially because Republicans got huge wins in 2010 (a key redistricting year), but also because Democrats have sabotaged themselves by implementing good government reforms like independent redistricting commissions in the many of the states they control (a notable absence of these in solid red states...). Like the post-2016 pro-electoral college attitude, the anti-anti-gerrymandering attitude of the modern Republican Party (and their 6 supreme court justices) is not really based on any "conservative" ideology - just pure partisan strategy. PR would be far better, I agree. But when Republicans refuse to pass anti-gerrymandering legislation specifically because they're saying using proportionality as a criterion would be unfair ... we're not getting there for a long time.
@logannichols5848 Жыл бұрын
@@riggsmarkham922 Texas is the only conservative state that is gerrymandered. This map is not gerrymandering.
@plompedu 10 ай бұрын
As European the Americans parties' ability to turn their political system into a mini civil war never fails to amaze me
@misspatvandriverlady7555 2 ай бұрын
Some people never got over the civil war, is the issue. 😒
@Shibasu_ Жыл бұрын
Shoutout to Roberts and Kavanaugh for choosing democracy over their personal beliefs
@WantToGoHomeSoon Жыл бұрын
But of course you mean constitutional republic.❤️
@user-ro9md9wp3j Жыл бұрын
Shoutout to boofing
@hightechjoe1 Жыл бұрын
What about other minorities, other than African American? Don't they deserve their own district too?
@neutrallineage3132 Жыл бұрын
@@WantToGoHomeSoon The United States is a democracy and a republic. The fundamentals of the constitution relies on both regardless of interpretation.
@Fenrir7 Жыл бұрын
@@hightechjoe1 If there is a minority with enough population density in a state to warrant one, sure.
@FalconFire13 Жыл бұрын
Don't know what's crazier about American politics, the states redrawing maps as they please for vote majority or that race is somehow the determinant of the winner or the fact that judiciary is partisan-based !
@201hastings Жыл бұрын
What country do you live in?
@geraltrivia9565 Жыл бұрын
Yea we hate it here
@DoctorCyan Жыл бұрын
Yeah we stopped being good at making rules for democracy, like, +140 years ago
@mehere8038 Жыл бұрын
@@DoctorCyan yeh, I don't get that! We're going to be voting on a change to our constitution later this year in Australia, apparently that no longer happens in the US?? That makes no sense to me, democracy is dynamic & is supposed to represent people & society & people & society change over time, so obviously laws, constitutions etc should change along with that
@zackeryhardy9504 Жыл бұрын
Well it is a 2 party system. And jury meandering is one of the major factors that enforces that. This was simply 1 example. You should see the way California draws their maps. In fact every state does this to enforce their 1 party system while competing on the national level. Sadly what this means is that the 2 parties do a poor job of representing anyone. Most vote for 1 party based on a singular issue. For example you will see full liberal democrats vote republican solely because they want to keep their guns. And you will have Red hearded republicans vote democrat because they thing the republicans are racist. The reality is that its horrible system and every step needs to be made to remove the 2 party program.
@toniderdon Жыл бұрын
Drawing maps to favor your own political party is disgusting. And people wanna tell me the US is a decent democracy lol. It is very simple, total votes should count and that's it. Nothing else. No drawing districts or anything like that. The person that gets the most votes becomes president or senator or whatever. Simple
@kawaiilette2462 Жыл бұрын
Great explanation Vox! This kind of thing can be super confusing for alot of people, we need more of these!
@jwanie366 Жыл бұрын
I can understand Chief Justice Roberts siding with the Dem-appointed Justices, but Kavanaugh really surprised me. This may be shocking to a lot of us, but not to the legal teams that were working hard behind the scenes to help make this happen. Thank you Marc Elias!
@emmae11685 Жыл бұрын
It’s not super surprising kavanaugh is the second most moderate conservative on the court. He often votes with roberts.
@RuthCuadrado Жыл бұрын
As a leftie I would say I’m not surprised. They have their convictions but they are not monsters as the media depicts them. When you act overall in good faith you are bound to find common ground d with the other side
@pagecarlee626 Жыл бұрын
Don't get me wrong, I don't think Kavanaugh is qualified or a good supreme court appointment but he has sided with Roberts a few times that were "surprising" and he is moderate compared to the other Republican appointments. I've read some of his statements and they are shockingly literate. Still don't think he deserves to be a Supreme Court Justice but if asked which two sided with Democratic Appointments I'd have guessed Roberts & Kavanaugh.
@ingiford175 Жыл бұрын
Had the same thought, did not expect Kavanaugh.
@hia5235 Жыл бұрын
You shouldve listened to Conservatives who said all along that he was too moderate. We were right of course.
@0oCalumo0 Жыл бұрын
As an Australian, it seems wild to me that race is a strong determining factor in how people vote. I know that Race can be a major factor in people's socio economic status due to various structural advantages and afforded to some, but it feels so alien for a video like this to be discussed in terms of race rather than something like income.
@omp199 Жыл бұрын
Americans are obsessed with race. The idea that a person might judge politicians on their merits doesn't ever seem to occur to them.
@jpmeyer09 Жыл бұрын
@@omp199 blacks always vote dem. whites show differing opinions.
@A.Martin Жыл бұрын
as Joe Biden said, "If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black" They call Black voters race traitors if they vote for republicans. That is how racist American Politics are.
@jamesvanderbilt201 Жыл бұрын
@@omp199t’s not that we’re obsessed with race, it’s that racism is still so prevalent that it’s impossible not to talk about. one example, just look up our incarceration rate. black ppl spend 19% longer in jail than white ppl who commit the same crime. black communities are pushed into riskier environments and given lower quality housing, education, and healthcare.
@ZappBranniglenn Жыл бұрын
The operative words here are "majority minority". And whether we should interpret the VRA to mean that it would be nice to nudge congressional representation to a degree that it closer matches the demographics of that state. It's more of a justification for battling gerrymandering than it is adhering to settled law.
@nickhiscock8948 Жыл бұрын
In Australia these electoral districts are determined by population number typically 100k per district. They are defined from the centre of the state capital out to state borders. The laws that govern this are controlled by an independent public service organisation called the Australian Electoral Commission. It is an organisation whos whole remit is independence from the government and fair accurate elections. Perhaps America needs something similar to take politics out of voting itself?
@seekerfractal Жыл бұрын
It would be nice if we could also see a map of the total population, and see how lines with the district map
@LourdVicious Жыл бұрын
We do know why they voted that way. Roberts was upholding his earlier decision that struck down section 5, because in that decision he purposefully said it would not impact section 2. This is a section 2 case. And Kavanaugh was upholding precedent. Surprising, yes. But not unknown.
@jeromefitzroy Жыл бұрын
At least they are principled
@Gilang-Ramadhan Жыл бұрын
Sorry, I still don't get the point on how the map/Black majority subdistrict is a problem. Can you help me to explain again in a simple way?
@felipevasconcelos6736 Жыл бұрын
@@Gilang-Ramadhan Imagine that 1/3 of the population of a state is black, and that it should be divided into 6 districts of equal population. Ideally, 2 of those districts will have a majority of black people, so that they have a proportionate political power. However, if you pack half of the black population into one district, and then spread the other half equally into the other 5 districts, the only black people who have any political power are the ones in that one district, meaning the political power of black people in the state was cut in half by the person who drew district boundaries. This is not a big deal when race is not politically relevant, but that’s very much not the case right now.
@Gilang-Ramadhan Жыл бұрын
@@felipevasconcelos6736 Okay I understand. But, is this case only happen in the state of Alabama? I watched the video and they showed us one district that is Black majority and the other Black majority people were cut in half into two districts. Is there any protest that coming from the Black people in that district about this?
@ksdragona_5583 Жыл бұрын
@@Gilang-RamadhanIt's definitely not just a problem in Alabama, it's an issue in many culturally diverse states, the South or otherwise.
@JustMe-em7hl Жыл бұрын
I still can’t believe that Clarence Thomas a black man himself, would vote to end black voter representation in the south.
@ultracapitalistutopia3550 Жыл бұрын
And the rights try to paint him as a victim of racism when Thomas himself is a racist against his very own disenfranchised people.
@josephgibson4250 Жыл бұрын
It's very simple he voted for his party not for what's logical rational or fair
@BenedictAllen_ Жыл бұрын
@@josephgibson4250yeah probably was influenced by those who helped him get the position
@Pallethands Жыл бұрын
He is of the belief that racial blindness is the only way to be equal. Any overt mention of race is inequality. Even if the result is equality.
@aeonjoey3d Жыл бұрын
Harlan Crowe
@THECONTEXTNEWS 11 ай бұрын
This is a terrific video. Very well done. So digestible, and great use of visuals/maps. The one area of improvement I would suggest is digging more into the law itself. Obviously, you all have to make the decision if a video with that level detail (I.e. eating your vegetables) can succeed with Social audiences, but I think it can. Keep it up.
@jgoldensshadow Жыл бұрын
The thing is, it doesn’t just affect Southern states. It affects every state, including California, Illinois, New York, etc.
@HuntingTarg Жыл бұрын
If this has a 'cascade effect' in California it could be very good for the state's future. The video didn't talk about California AT ALL. Wonder why...
@arnoldschwarzenegger8005 Жыл бұрын
@@HuntingTarg Because it's not an issue in California. California has a non-partisan redistricting commission, or more accurately a bipartisan one, where they don't have to deal with this nonsense. No political party can gain control and gerrymander.
@dudewatevs56 Жыл бұрын
@@arnoldschwarzenegger8005 Yeah, New York would have been a better example.
@wildfire9280 11 ай бұрын
@@HuntingTarg You didn’t mention California’s legislature doesn’t draw its own maps AT ALL. I wonder why…
@andrew7693 Жыл бұрын
When deciding this decision, Kavannaugh made clear that this was decided based off principles of statutory interpretation NOT constitutionality. Section 2 of the voting rights act can still be attacked on constitutional grounds. So it’s really a temporary win. However, the future of the voting rights act is still undecided.
@krystal7958 Жыл бұрын
Good, voting rights act should be struck down along with 1990 cra.
@stoonookw Жыл бұрын
Can you explain principles of statutory interpretation vs constitutionality in a nut shell fam? Not a poli-sci major over here
@jovialjadegoliath7071 Жыл бұрын
@@stoonookw The decision is about the maps being illegal under the statute (i.e., the voting rights act), it is not about whether the statute itself is constitutional
@adora_was_taken Жыл бұрын
@@krystal7958 why
@krystal7958 Жыл бұрын
@@adora_was_taken it's bad.
@Arlae_Nova Жыл бұрын
As a person who grew up with a proportional representation voting system, where people vote instead of land, this kind of stuff never fails to amaze me
@kingthomasthehun8408 Жыл бұрын
the idea is that constituancies or districts allow local issues to be adressed candidates are encourged to focus on local issues as well as national ones
@M69392 Жыл бұрын
@@kingthomasthehun8408 so a single, state-wide district that totally avoids gerrymandering would not be local enough for... a federal job?
@donkeysaurusrex7881 Жыл бұрын
@@M69392 It is already bad enough when one representative has several hundred thousand constituents. Do you really be better if one person represented the tens of millions of people in California or Texas?
@M69392 Жыл бұрын
@@donkeysaurusrex7881 No. Google "proportional representation" to understand what most other countries do.
@donkeysaurusrex7881 Жыл бұрын
@@M69392 I don’t care what most other countries do. Having lived in several the near absolute monarchies were the only ones as good as the US.
@Aliquis.frigus Жыл бұрын
I'm looking at this from abroad and 1: Why is gerrymandering still a thing? And 2, the racism inherent in the system is outrageous. Drawing electoral districts so a minority can be a majority inside that district? It's basically the same as saying "go to the back of the bus, so you can be a majority over there". Just bring on statewide proportional representation already...
@DanteM17 5 ай бұрын
That analogy doesn’t make sense. And gerrymandering was literally made to dilute the voting power of groups like African Americans, which is why there is a system in place to counter that where states need a a majority minority district. You actually have to learn about the history of this by going back like 150 years
@krone5 2 ай бұрын
some states are so large that they may favor certain parts of the states if it was just proportional, we have the senate for that anyhow.
@jillyapple1 Жыл бұрын
This was a very well-done video. The animation, script, etc. Thank you.
@agcaoiliproductions9580 Жыл бұрын
“This map has a problem…” Yeah it’s the map of Alabama, get me tf outta here.
@1985toyotacamry Жыл бұрын
You're not wrong
@lovemoviesful2 Жыл бұрын
Sweet home Alabama!
@wheeliebeast7679 Жыл бұрын
I can hear the banjos playing already
@Flesh_Wizard Жыл бұрын
Cleatus and his sisterwife are coming watch out!
@louishermann7676 Жыл бұрын
Alabama is beautiful and it's people are generally very kind-hearted. It does NOT deserve the reputation it has, especially from people who've never set foot there.
@pax2758 Жыл бұрын
Gerrymandering is the single greatest political cause of most of our most pressing problems as a nation. Gerrymandering causes extreme candidates to win primaries hence the current GOP.
@Sam-ps8zz Жыл бұрын
And our current president
@9forMortalMen Жыл бұрын
Do you not realize that gerrymandering is essentially a constant in a democracy? There is no beating it.
@pax2758 Жыл бұрын
@@9forMortalMen I understand that gerrymandering by either party creates extreme positions and candidates. Gerrymandering is at the root of most of our political turmoil. Balanced congressional districts would produce moderate candidates and not dilute anyone's vote.
@9forMortalMen Жыл бұрын
@@pax2758 what’s a “balanced district”?
@Khobai Жыл бұрын
@@9forMortalMen yes there is. you make gerrymandering illegal. politicians should not be able to redistrict. districts should be determined using mathematical formulae and rough square shapes (as close to squares as they can get)
@hispalismapping155 10 ай бұрын
"We are all the same, part of the human race" *Cries when black population isnt in the same electoral district*
@TheAlchaemist 10 ай бұрын
Gerrymandering exists because the single representative per constituency is utterly MATHEMATICALLY undemocratic. It totally wipes out representation. If every constituency has 50% + 1 for party you end up with a 100% of the legislature for party A and ZERO for party B effectively wiping out representation for almost HALF of the population. And with "clever" Gerrymandering over half... the fact that no one ever mentions that is baffling! The system design is fatally flawed.
@QuantumWalnut Жыл бұрын
It is quite strange that they acknowledge the importance of proportionality, without questioning that FPTP voting system is definitionally anti-proportional. Why not just switch to MMP (mixed-member proportional), STV (single-transferable vote), or party-list?
@20quid Жыл бұрын
The best possible solution would have been to make Alabama a single 7-member district, make Louisiana a single 5-member district, and make Georgia two 7-member districts, and run elections under Single Transferable Vote. Then pretty much everyone in those states would have at least one representative that actually represents them.
@lllluka Жыл бұрын
STV has been proposed in the house, but MMP or party list will never ever happen. Americans will never ever accept a system that gives more power to political parties and defeats the idea of "running for office".
@tfae Жыл бұрын
New Zealand adopted MMP because a decade of austerity caused the public to reject both major parties. Australia adopted ranked voting because a second conservative party threatened to split the vote. What crisis will cause the USA to change?
@titanman33 Жыл бұрын
@@tfaethe latter
@taoliu3949 Жыл бұрын
MMP and party list would be unconstitutional. House reps directly represents their own districts, getting rid of districts would dilute those local concerns.
@JenkinsAnt Жыл бұрын
In the Alabama case, the Supreme Court just tossed the argument that Ron DeSantis gave for his gerrymander in Florida, so that one will be interesting to watch in the lower courts, and in state courts.
@swinde Жыл бұрын
Florida has a constitutional amendment that outlaws gerrymandering, but the republican legislature continues to gerrymander. The last map was basically created by Ron DeSantis, the governor.
@JenkinsAnt Жыл бұрын
@@swinde yes. They don’t care. When the amendment passed in 2010 (I think it was 2010), they gerrymandered IMMEDIATELY after. The state supreme court forced them to change some parts of the map. The state court judge, who was appointed to the bench by Ron DeSantis, blocked Ron DeSantis’ map only to have the appellate court reverse his decision and keep the gerrymandered map in place for the 2022 election.
@FurryEskimo Жыл бұрын
I hear jury meandering is super common in my area (mostly east coast) and I’m glad to have it banned, but in general I think we could just do it better, we don’t really need districts like we used to..
@Grundig305 2 ай бұрын
Conservatives justices occasionally vote liberal, liberal judges NEVER swing conservative.
@GustavSvard Жыл бұрын
The core problem is First Past The Post voting. That system needs replacing with Proportional Representation for the House. Either state by state or even on a national level. If done state by state that would mean Alabama's 7 seats would be assigned so that those 7 seats are filled with politicians from each party so that the % of seats they get as close as possible matches the % of votes they got. If done on a national level it'd mean smaller parties would get some seats as well, breaking the duopoloy.
@mehere8038 Жыл бұрын
agreed & additionally it also prevents vote splitting, so for elections like the president, people could vote for, say Bernie 1, Hillary 2, Trump 3, rather than having to choose between voting for Bernie or Hillary & being forced to vote for Hillary, knowing Bernie was otherwise just going to split the vote & give the win to trump
@zackeryhardy9504 Жыл бұрын
I think that is one part, but the big thing is to tear down the 2 party system. This video seems to be highly favoring the deomocrats, but they are just as if not more evil than the republican party. Just look at California and the craziness they to to hold their super-majority using similar tactics. And how they manipulate their voting bases with aspects of the policy that only serves to actually keep people down so that they have reasons to vote for them. I personally do not want to only vote for 1 person. i would prefer a ranking system. The largest issue is that people cannot vote for who they want because they would then not be voting for the person who could beat their opponent. It means you have to choose between trump or biden. And that aint a choice anyone wants to make. I mean even if you like one of those candidates, I know everyone has someone in mind that they would like to choose first but can't. Why not make it so voting for the person you want doesn't mean not voting for the person you think will win. Think about it rank the candidates and use a point system based on that. Then you can vote for both the person you like and the person who has more clout. And then you may have some supprising results. 3rd parties actually have a chance of getting people in office. Right now the Democrats and republicans do not represent anyone. This case outlined in this video shows that. Just because republicans put someone in office does not mean they agree with each other.
@varoonnone7159 Жыл бұрын
Proportional voting system has its own defects. Why not plural FPTP with two or three elected representatives per constituency. The number of constituencies will have to be reduced accordingly
@kadenze6176 Жыл бұрын
@Blank not gonna be a problem in the uk for long hopefully; big up labour 🌹🌹
@hewdelfewijfe Жыл бұрын
@@varoonnone7159 I prefer the defects of party-list voting compared to alternatives.
@EveloGrave Жыл бұрын
I am astonished this happened. This is such good news for basic human rights.
@exodus6996 Жыл бұрын
all states are gerrymandering and it is one sided which states they’re changing b4 the election. They need to change every state instead of changing ones in favor for one political party
@juandomingoquirozmendez3246 Жыл бұрын
US doesn't have what UN considers as "human rights". However term "human rights" gets a lot of synonymoussuch as Civil Rights, Natural Rights, Fundamental Rights and so forth. To my knowledge what you have is very tiny set of rights, called Civil Rights, and Civil Rights could be disposable according to lawmakers interest. Also I guess you as citizens are invested with a set of individual guarantees by you Constitution. But no more May I Be wrong, because the correct definitions of the human rights are sometimes difuse.
@omp199 Жыл бұрын
Lines on a map have nothing to do with basic human rights.
@davida99 Жыл бұрын
@MRM00M0066Why would whites do that to themselves 😂
@suchmuse Жыл бұрын
@@omp199 but voting is a human right, and only being able to elect 1 out of the supposed 2 representatives due to gerrymandering is an act against your right to vote.
@Yupppi Жыл бұрын
I recognize that United States is extremely complicated to a foreigner, but my first thought would actually be that dividing areas based on race presentation is scary. I wouldn't be surprised if someone said that white and black populations have completely different political desires and representatives though, in which case it should (probably) help with that. The utopia would be that there's just people representing and people choosing, not related to their race. However if the state has to split regions based on race, what about other minorities than black population? Mexicans? Italians? The list goes on (albeit many european minorities have long ago migrated more to just "white population" I assume). I don't know if that kind of situation will happen in the future with US, but I wonder if this system will also land in my country. There has been a big increase in different minorities through refugees. However the grim part is that there has been only few politicians in the parliament from minorities, and many cases where they abused their rights and either did something illegal or straight out lied to create race related political turmoil. Which is a really bad thing for the future minority representatives and politicians, something that hinders the original white population from voting them as people who represent everyone living here equally in the politics fairly and honestly. Looking forward how people try to solve their differences in the future.
@zoradelaney9412 8 ай бұрын
In Alabama, 92% of the residents are either black or white. Other folks are very small populations in the state, and thus not demographically clustered enough to create districts for them. The black population has been living in Alabama (and in USA in general) about as long as the white population -- for CENTURIES, for both -- so your "original white population" vs. implied black newcomers language certainly does NOT apply here. This map was designed precisely because of -- using your words to describe a different situation, in your country -- white Alabamans did "something illegal or straight out lied to create race related political turmoil". MASSIVE violations of the 14th and 15th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, harming the black population......leading to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, federal decrees, and thus maps like this one.
@DanteM17 5 ай бұрын
@@zoradelaney9412Yea, his comment is a joke lol. From “the non white minority leaders creating turmoil,” which obviously isn’t true to “what about other minorities,” which if you look at Texas or California for example you would see districts that are majority Latino and Asian since they make up a sizable population. Not knowing that this is race based so “Italians” wouldn’t have their own district and are obviously considered white. Etc.
@harryhaeb Жыл бұрын
Thank god I've been waiting for Alabama to be illegal.
@PresidentW100 Жыл бұрын
I live in South Carolina where, surprise surprise, we face the same issue. As an African American voter, however, I don’t want majority-minority districts; such schemes allow incumbents to remain in office for indefinite amounts of time where they often become unaccountable and re-elected based on name recognition, breeding a corruption that’s hard to shake. Rather, I want districts to simply become competitive. Take SC district 1 for example. We need healthy, democratic competition that will allow more moderate, SANE politicians to emerge.
@bamboosho0t Жыл бұрын
The problem Blk people have is we expect the system to have a heart and “give” us an opportunity. Everything in this world has been TAKEN. If you want something, you take it. We need to just TAKE what is ours. Legally, of course.
@A.Martin Жыл бұрын
yea it enables safe districts where you only get elected because you know people who ensure you don't get competition from your own party and the other party has no competition.
@20quid Жыл бұрын
There's no reason why SC couldn't be a single 7-member district that elects using Single Transferrable Vote. That way, everyone would have at least one representative that actually represents them and there are no uncompetitive seats.
@donkeysaurusrex7881 Жыл бұрын
Not surprisingly the current representative of this district is rumored to be quite unhappy with the ruling. She grew up in Selma and lived in Birmingham as an adult which gave her two power bases in this district. Now the two will almost certainly be in different districts, and she’ll be voted out of whichever one she runs in by someone more authentically local.
@bisaVCI Жыл бұрын
I think (IANAL) the issue here is that SCOTUS has declared political gerrymandering fair game. So while we would want to fight gerrymandering as a political issue, we cannot. Relying on the VRA and majority-minority districts is a flawed vessel, but at least it is something to check the 'to the winner go the spoils' we see all around this country. And obligatory note: Many states have started to restrict gerrymandering on the state level. While that sounds great in a vacuum or for your state house, it has very strange results in the US house. We would need a federal solution here for the federal elections. I'm still disappointed last congress got close but didn't manage to pull through because of the GOP mounting a filibuster in the Senate.
@ThatLadyBird Жыл бұрын
Justice Roberts is known to slide left from time to time. Often the constitution just simply cant be interpreted in any other way. Justice Gorscuch just wrote a huge opinion acknowledging the history of abuse of Native Americans' rights. Justices are supposed to be above politics, but these days, its newsworthy when they actually do.
@varoonnone7159 Жыл бұрын
He is the new Sandra Day O'Connor
@goob3826 Жыл бұрын
Why do they point out Alabama when Wisconsin, especially Milwaukee (and many other Midwest states/cities) that is known for being the most segregated city in the country because of said gerrymandering.
@derekrequiem4359 4 ай бұрын
That's because this video is about Alabama, not Wisconsin. That would explain why the video talks about Alabama, not Wisconsin.
@goob3826 4 ай бұрын
@@derekrequiem4359 I meant why are they spinning this topic as something of higher importance to cities with more issues surrounding the same topic?
@ampersandellipsis747 5 ай бұрын
They should just have the sum votes of the state instead of using districts. If you want to you can just split up the electoral votes by the percent that won that party, like 6 and 4 if the state has 10 electoral votes (in between percentages go to the party who is almost at that vote like 57% vs 43% would be 6 to 4 since 57 is closer to the next 10% than 43). If everyone is supposed to have equal vote districts and electoral votes shouldn't exist. This would also stop candidates from ignoring states they would just lose and pandering to states with higher per-person votes + states they might be able to swing, since they would have to appeal to the majority of people.
@HibijibiCraft Жыл бұрын
Cant believe anyone can be anti fair-voting. It should be a crime when goverments do this and voters should never touch the party again
@alittlebitgone Жыл бұрын
But that's exactly what conservatives are, it's their entire being. Conservatives can justify ANY action they take, because they are right, and by being right nothing they do can ever be wrong.
@v3rlon Жыл бұрын
There are only two parties (effectively) in this country. They both do it, so now you can't vote for either of them. Now what.
@connorcampbell5274 Жыл бұрын
Because this isn't fair voting. This simply makes a particular kind of gerrymandering legal. In a district based system, there will always be inequality, inaccuracies, and non-representation. It doesn't matter how you draw the lines, once you draw them, you've put the game in someone's favor. What this decision does, is pretty much ensure that any sufficiently litigious political group and cry to the courts it's not representative enough.
@20quid Жыл бұрын
It's fairer but it isn't fair. The problem with majority-minority districts is that they deny representation to minorities living outside of the minority districts as well as denying representation to the members of the majority who live within the minority districts. A far better solution would be multi-member districts elected under the STV voting system. Then pretty much everyone would have at least one representative that looks like them.
@coolorphans Жыл бұрын
Fair voting? You're the type of person that thinks that everyone deserves a participation trophy.
@thewb8329 Жыл бұрын
Perhaps Roberts and Kavanaugh see the long term democracy of our nation more important than the autocratic desires of the party they are affiliated with.
@frederickleo2386 Жыл бұрын
I hope you're right 🙏
@100c0c Жыл бұрын
They always make decisions based on their philosophy and interpretation of the constitution. You just thinks it's partisan politics when their interpretation doesn't go your way.
@xaviercopeland2789 Жыл бұрын
Good thing we don’t have democracy, huh?
@xaviercopeland2789 Жыл бұрын
You know, given we never have been and are a republic. Representative republic.
@EbuCallinav Жыл бұрын
A Representative Republic Still falls under the same blanket term of a democracy though...
@christophsaviation2045 10 ай бұрын
if we just held proportional voted instead of a constituency-based majority vote, there wouldn’t be any gerrymandering. There’s no gerrymandering in Germany, cause if a party gets 20% of the votes, it gets 20% of the seats in parliament. Easy as that. It doesn’t matter where these votes come from.
@PrincessTreasure Жыл бұрын
I’m actually so shocked but relieved that they struck this.
@supercarrson100 Жыл бұрын
Seems like this should’ve been done a while ago
@austincolyer1977 Жыл бұрын
I learned about this discrepancy in High School, granted I live in Alabama. But we've known about this for many years.
@calebprouty288 Жыл бұрын
If I had a penny for every time that phrase could be validly used...
@Mokuteke Жыл бұрын
@@austincolyer1977 I live in michigan and my econ/American history class also taught us about Gerrymandering. I graduated in 2022
@supercarrson100 Жыл бұрын
@@Mokuteke no way. I have the exact same story, even graduated 2022 lol. Where you go to school?
@sabretooth1997 Жыл бұрын
It's unfortunate that this doesn't go nearly far enough and outlaw gerrymandering altogether. Instead it seems they used an opportunity to pander to (or "virtue signal") race as a convenient means to limit damage that could have been much greater. Gerrymandering being yet another of the myriad tools the "two" parties use to maintain hegemony over the entire political process.
@donkeysaurusrex7881 Жыл бұрын
It mandates gerrymandering.
@willmorris8198 Жыл бұрын
The problem is the supreme court can't outlaw gerrymandering because states have the right to draw the districts how they want. Racial gerrymandering is illegal because it denies voters of a specific race equal protection under the law which violates the 14th amendment. Partisan gerrymandering doesn't deny anyone equal protection so it's not unconstitutional. Because it's a state right congress can do nothing, therefore it would take a constitutional amendment to end gerrymandering.
@teddy8459 Жыл бұрын
I'm a fan of this move. That said, I'll always struggle to see true fairness in the assumption that groups of people with the same skin color all have the same political interests, so that one of the only and biggest factors we use to draw districts is skin color. There has a be a better way--one that doesn't require more district redrawing every decade to account for population movement--that would result in fairer voting practices. I'm not even speaking from a sociological standpoint (which, idk, maybe that's an issue), but this sytem is too messy and unstable to last.
@miz4535 Жыл бұрын
proportional representation, obviously.
@HuntingTarg Жыл бұрын
@@miz4535 Proportional representation was in the US Constitution, Article I, Section 2. It allowed for no more than one representative for every _thirty thousand_ people. The Apportionment Act of 1911 instigated the problem when it capped the size of the House of Representatives at 435 individuals, which necessitated the establishment of districts to maintain proportionality. However, without it, the House of Representatives would Constitutionally have over 11,000 members based on the 2020 Census. Unwieldly does not begin to describe that situation. The answer would be a Constitutional Amendment annulling the Apportionment Act and increasing the number specified in the Constitution to something more congruent to modern times, maybe around a million? Wait, that would mean some states would lose Representatives. Now do you understand the problem?
@tzerpa9446 Жыл бұрын
The fact that judge Thomas voted in favor of distributions that hurt African American representation blows my mind 🤯 🤢🤮
@ImBalance Жыл бұрын
Will this do anything to change future gerrymandering across the country though? I am glad the Supreme Court is challenging this corrupt electoral system, but we need policies that ensure fairness in the future, like requiring the shortest splitline algorithm be used to draw districts.
@Ikajo Жыл бұрын
Well, the real solution to America's political issues is a single-voter system. Sort of like a point system rather than the whole "winner takes it all". Add in a multi party government and you get a pretty good system. Each party gets representation based on the percentage of votes they received. With a minimum amount, of course. This allows for more nuances and compromises. Of course, the very first step would be to heavily regulate lobbying and making it illegal to receive money from individuals or corporations. As that is fertile ground for corruption. In general, less money in the process.
@holdenennis Жыл бұрын
Proportional representation is a better solution.
@holdenennis Жыл бұрын
@@Ikajo do you mean the single transferable vote?
@humanistwriting5477 Жыл бұрын
or no districts in states. RCV is a an better option
@ImBalance Жыл бұрын
@@humanistwriting5477 I 100% agree ranked-choice voting is one of the best electoral reforms we could implement, especially coupled with other policy improvements.
@nomore-constipation Жыл бұрын
Let us not forget gerrymandering isn't just racial divided. They also cut it up on voting, registered voting and possibly of other factors Gerrymandering just needs to be replaced entirely imo we need to cut up the districts in a way that does not pool whatever groups forcefully into someone's ideal situation
@roryh2241 Жыл бұрын
It’s tougher than it seems because each district needs to have the same number of people, so it frankly doesn’t really matter which district all the farms and small towns are in, but obviously they could’ve made fairer districts.
@tuesdaygrey7506 Жыл бұрын
Is the "each district needs the same number of people" exclusive to Alabama? If it isn't, I have huge news for Florida (who has districts with smaller populations than towns I've lived in).
@adrianosbrandao Жыл бұрын
You guys should abolish the old district-based electoral system and adopt proportional voting like it’s done in several countries.
@ZandaaaaXD Жыл бұрын
The fact that you can have court decisions where the Justices don't vote unanimously, and are split somewhat evenly, is kind of wild to me. It means that either a) our laws are not written objectively, and are open to interpretation or b) Justices don't cast their vote aligned with the law roughly half of the time. It seems like at least one of those must be true in order to get split decisions in the supreme court. The thing is, the first one has some wild implications for the foundational belief that the law applies equally to everyone, because of it's open to interpretation I don't see how that could be true. And if the second thing is true then what's the point of Justices in the first place? Might as well have the House or Senate give rulings.
@avocadoarmadillo7031 Жыл бұрын
The Constitution is very open to interpretation, and law isn't all that objective in many cases. As for your 2nd concern, there's a lot of that too!
@user-ze9mh6gn9q Жыл бұрын
Every single law is open to interpretation depending on situations or new needs of society. That's why there are nine judges and not only one. If it had just one, then it would be autocracy. They place nine to try to give democratic rulings.
@Efti-lz4nl Жыл бұрын
Talk about separation of the political forces or whatever the term is…
@user-armas Жыл бұрын
the law being open to interpretation is one of the first things you learn in law. they are made by and for humans, and so they are interpretable. equity under law is (generally, but not really) sought after, but isn’t an inherent trait.
@0h0h0h0 Жыл бұрын
... laws are always open to interpretation. Some things might be generally agreed upon that they're wrong, but "how" wrong they are is always up to a judge and/or a jury (depending on the country). E.g. the difference between different degrees of murder. Or if you murder someone in self-defence. Some might even say the latter (depending on the situation) is not wrong. This is really not so shocking, the shocking part is is that the highest court in the US is still a two-party system
@newbie4789 Жыл бұрын
Ok. I'm immediately confused by the idea that the court is ALSO split politically . I thought a court should be a politically neutral one
@louishermann7676 Жыл бұрын
Impossible when they are appointed by partisans.
@antoniousai1989 Жыл бұрын
There are people arguing that the US isn't a real democracy because they don't have separation of power ongoing which is considered a staple of a healthy democracy.
@m0L3ify Жыл бұрын
Read up on the Federalist Society. That will explain everything you need to know.
@CaptainFritz28 Жыл бұрын
Keyword: "should."
@taoliu3949 Жыл бұрын
Yes and no. The "split" is spun up based on who appointed the judges. There are general trends on how judges rule but it's moreso on a spectrum than a hard left vs right.
@Tiger_III Жыл бұрын
the "i like beer but not bud light" guy came thru on this
@oceanshmienek5462 Жыл бұрын
Correction: Kennedy is what we would call a swing justice. Even though he identified as conservative, there were many cases where he voted liberal or voted conservative depending on the issue without being totally partisan to his political party.
@BRM202 Жыл бұрын
Tennessee is Gerrymandered big time. Wonder if they'll have to redraw lines now?
@Tabbystripes102 Жыл бұрын
Ohio rejected 3 reworks of their gerrymandered mess and still had to use a horrible map for the last election even though we voted for a fair redrawing with each new census
@CakeofPixels Жыл бұрын
This is on racial gerrymandering, not gerrymandering in general so it wouldn't apply to Tennessee.
@fcsuper Жыл бұрын
@@CakeofPixels Yeah, supporting one party over another is considered a legit factor in drawing up districts according to previous SCOTUS rulings. It's a weird distinction, since you want to represent the people, not a party. A party shouldn't be factor at all, but right now, it's a factor that's considered more important than everything else in most states.
@alexanderho6846 Жыл бұрын
@@Tabbystripes102And a state constitutional amendment to do so, correct?
@BRM202 Жыл бұрын
@@CakeofPixels Memphis is packed and Nashville is cracked along racial and voting lines.
@2seep Жыл бұрын
Gerrymandering should be illegal for every single state, everyone does this democrats and republican and it’s annoying, just let the people speak and stop being controlling.
@jairoherrera4040 Жыл бұрын
We wouldnt have this issue if they combined the senate and house of rep. under one entity.
@ugheieiemmmfmfmff Жыл бұрын
Republicans do it more on account of the aggregate
@fcsuper Жыл бұрын
Various states have removed the ability of Legislatures to gerrymander to varying degrees. California and Arizona were the first states to eliminate it completely (well, as completely as we can at the moment), followed by other states, such as Colorado. These states have ended gerrymandering by taking redistricting out of the Legislative process completely, moving it directly to average citizens. It's still technically a partisan processes, but the power to do weird things with districts is effectively gone. The greatest effect of this can be seen in California because of its huge population, where district shapes have drastically simplified and follow multi-dimensional population characteristics.
@ShankarSivarajan Жыл бұрын
Someone has to draw districts. "Gerrymandering" usually means only that the speaker prefers it favor one side more.
@fcsuper Жыл бұрын
@@ShankarSivarajan This isn't true at all. The term has a very specific history and is used to describe very obvious results.
@Nonamelol. Жыл бұрын
4:05 the fact that “race” has to be a considering factor is the reason this country is falling apart.
@nouhowlmao2809 Жыл бұрын
Why?
@christopheredge2111 2 ай бұрын
They will let them use the existing map in this years elections.
@solentbum Жыл бұрын
We have a similar problem in the UK where there is a dispute over suggested changes to Constituency boundaries based on historical voting patterns. It's a problem inherent in a FPTP voting system.
@varoonnone7159 Жыл бұрын
Apart from that issue. You had the possibility for Australian style preferential voting system or a plural first past the post system. In my home country, Mauritius, we elect three MPs per constituency
@TheAlchaemist 10 ай бұрын
The system is flawed. And was inherited by the US. Interestingly the assembly in Northern Ireland has proportional representation with transferable vote, like Ireland instead of being like Westminster.
@varoonnone7159 10 ай бұрын
@@TheAlchaemist Proportional voting is jumbo mumbo. It's based on percentages so you don't elect people but vote for a list
@TheAlchaemist 10 ай бұрын
@varoonnone7159 there are many variants in different countries. Sometimes you vote for an individual rep for a constituency and a party for the proportional part and you can even vote multiple preferences. One might say that if you are clever you can come up with a solution that does not wipe representation. Clearly the FPTP with single rep per constituency is by far the worse. By simply having 50% +1 in every constituency effectively ends up with 100% of party A and 0% for party B. And with gerrymandering you can achieve that with even less than 50%. I have to assume you see the problem there, right? Because if not then there isn't much else that I can say...
@Mollywinelover Жыл бұрын
As a Canadian watching this, i have nothing but more confusion on how elections in the US work. I get it's a foreign country but setting up voting areas based on skin colour just seems to promote differences.
@konstantinosnikolakakis8125 Жыл бұрын
We have the same problem up here, except it’s not race based. In the states, each district is drawn by each state. Up here, our ridings (voter districts) are drawn federally. But we still have the problem, Trudeau came second in the popular vote, but still won because he had the most seats.
@Mollywinelover Жыл бұрын
@@konstantinosnikolakakis8125 true but our prime minister is not elected by popular vote. They're elected by seat count which is why the federal agency decides the boundaries and it is not a political party that makes those decisions.
@A.Martin Жыл бұрын
when they draw districts they should have no data on the peoples that make up the state, the only data they should have is the map of different population centers, as you want to keep population centers together as much as possible, and make districts as compact as possible.
@CassidyCope Жыл бұрын
@@konstantinosnikolakakis8125 To add to this, explicit gerrymandering is much harder here because all of our ridings are drawn by Elections Canada, but we still get results like this due to the inherent issues of First Past The Post. The Conservatives' support is concentrated in a few provinces that are heavily conservative, so even an independent agency like EC can't possibly draw reasonable borders that give the Tories their rightful representation. Only implementing a new voting system that either doesn't need these borders (like nationwide proportional representation) or renders them unimportant (like MMPR) could totally fix the riding problem.
@Mollywinelover Жыл бұрын
@@A.Martin I believe that is what Canada does. It's an independent federal agency that does it so it's non political.
@gustav24-7-52 Жыл бұрын
I've been saying it since the 1970s when I was still a little kid........A district should be completely built from a collect of whole counties. In larger metropolitan areas where a county may have too many citizens to make one district......a district would be built from complete cities within a county or two cities bordering each other within neighboring counties. A district that includes a city or county and then runs for 90 miles down a highway only including the highway and then open up to include another city or county just to increase or decrease the demographics within that district is absolutely bonkers
@drawingcheetah7407 10 ай бұрын
Im an indian and I do not understand how you could drag the judiciary into being a political party battlefield
@CaptainM792 Жыл бұрын
*Points at map* “My lord, is that legal?” The Supreme Court: “I will make it illegal.”
@danielsullen3065 Жыл бұрын
I have grown up in the two black counties in East Alabama that are currently split between two districts (Macon and Bullock County). Macon is the location of Tuskegee, Alabama...a very historic majority all-black town that has one of the highest democratic percentage votes for years for a county. Thank you for covering this VOX and for thinking of us!!!
@jeremy28135 Жыл бұрын
The Tuskegee Airmen! Heroes. American Patriots that will never be forgotten 🇺🇸
@suds5214 Жыл бұрын
I was taught and read in textbooks, in the 1970s, that gerrymandering was Illegal. What happened to change it since then?
@nicholaswolf7164 Жыл бұрын
"This map has a problem, it's a map of Alabama...." STOP RIGHT THERE BUD..... enough said.
@nerd26373 Жыл бұрын
Vox offers concise and straightforward information. They never falter when it comes to stitching information in a seamless manner
@daylight3325 Жыл бұрын
Lies. They’re just like any other news organization
@angusstuff Жыл бұрын
Yeah, but I hate how their "Reasoning" for the 2 people voting for the law were all political. Maybe they are just good people who for once set aside politics for the greater good! Every one in the supreme court is still human with a conscious!
@lawtraf8008 Жыл бұрын
@@angusstuff they aren't good people
@ivettrivera5306 Жыл бұрын
@@angusstuff nah dawg their already at the highest place, the supreme court, you would really believe nothing is happening behind the scenes that may have influenced their actions in the slightest bit?
@akhromyn Жыл бұрын
@@angusstuff Justice Clarence Thomas was discovered to intentionally not report countless gifts from an influential donor of a political party despite the law requiring federals officials such as himself to do so.
@LazyHermit Жыл бұрын
And here I thought the Supreme Court made knowledge of the map illegal. Good thing I stayed on to listen.
@egillis214 10 ай бұрын
Wow... that map is better than most every other states...
@c.storbin3271 Жыл бұрын
It’s all about redrawing lines in different oddly shaped districts then the current oddly shaped districts to ensure a different party can win.
@Zveebo Жыл бұрын
I don’t honestly think people should be surprised by Roberts here - despite being a Bush appointee, he’s voted with the liberal justices quite a few times, and his judgements rarely come across as especially partisan. Kavanagh is more of a surprise.
@brianfox340 Жыл бұрын
This is absolutely true. Roberts is one of the VERY few moderate Republicans left in the public eye (politician or not), but Kavanaugh is apparently more of a wild card than was expected.
@Kleavers Жыл бұрын
The fact that a court is another political tool makes the US basically a banana republic.
@miketurcotte7477 3 ай бұрын
Explain to me how Congress districts that go from one end of the state to the other are compact?
@aukemeijer1762 Жыл бұрын
Rare Kavanaugh W? On a serious note, the fact that the US has partisan judges is almost funny
@shakuurali7193 Жыл бұрын
Thanks VOX for all you guys do. I learn something every-time I watch a video especially pertaining to US politics.
@acmelka Жыл бұрын
Why did two conservative judges vote for the fair and sensible way? Sad that question has to be asked
@sentinel5524 Жыл бұрын
Because you interpret fair and sensible to be what they interpreted as constitutional... as they always do. Some people don't always view their decisions as being "correct," yet usually don't interpret law as the justices do.
@astk5214 Жыл бұрын
Because this is one of your ideas that is not deformity by radical new beliefs
@Applecore37 Жыл бұрын
props for the voiceover guy for showing this illegal map and then getting arrested
@Allin7days Жыл бұрын
The fact that politicians are playing a game with the district maps is sickening...
@Charlie_Loves Жыл бұрын
Honestly hope that my state of Florida reinstated a minority majority district. The brazen attack out governor has done on our districts is not only callous toward these communities but is in direct violation of the voting rights act.
@knmonlinemedia Жыл бұрын
sue the governor?
@Charlie_Loves Жыл бұрын
@@knmonlinemedia I’m not interested in tax payers money.
@RK-cj4oc Жыл бұрын
How about we dont divide our country more based on racial lines and we just vote as Americans.
@iversiafanatic Жыл бұрын
@@RK-cj4oc this country was built on slavery. Get this ahistorical nonsense out of here.
@Charlie_Loves Жыл бұрын
@@RK-cj4oc that’s not how this works, the voting rights act specifically ensures that minority presentation exists in every state. You’re trying to erase minority presentation and pretend that is a good thing, it is not. If you were a person who actually held American values consistent with this nations history you’d embrace diversity and proportional representation. Not ensure that our political roster is as white as possible in the name of loyalty to American politics.
@missmindy3803 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for the explanation. Will be sharing this, especially since it’s only 5 min long. Great for my independent voting friends in CA to know what’s going on elsewhere. 👍👍🇺🇸❤️
@BigBoi678 10 ай бұрын
Gerrymandering is unfair, so lets gerrymander until its fair
@captoblivious1 8 ай бұрын
Gerrymandering will ultimately lead to the destruction of the party. That's how we have gotten extremist, unqualified representatives who have created dysfunction in the house.
@lazyboy300 Жыл бұрын
the whole system is bizarre and should be replaced. districts shouldnt be drawn by politicians in power at a given moment. their shape should obey clear and objetive permanent guidelines. other countries with district voting have much better systems that are not used to either under or over represent certain races. gerrymandering is absurd in itself and is what orban have been doing to remain indefinitely in power in hungary. the usa needs to redesign their entire electoral system. maybe it made sense in the late 1700s, but it sure doesnt now. weird local voting methods, electoral college, winner takes all in each state in presidential elections, elections on a weekday, none of it makes any sense
@isaac_aren Жыл бұрын
This whole issue with districts is instantly solved by switching to a proportional voting system, namely Single Transferable vote which is well suited to electing multiple people at once
@20quid Жыл бұрын
The best possible solution would have been to make Alabama a single 7-member district, make Louisiana a single 5-member district, and make Georgia two 7-member districts, and run elections under Single Transferable Vote. Then pretty much everyone in those states would have at least one representative that actually represents them.
@dustinjones7458 Жыл бұрын
Only problem with proportional vote is you're asking both political parties to give up power lol Since it would enfranchise all voters, not just in battleground states. Which means it's terribly not like to happen.
@thespectator5259 Жыл бұрын
@@dustinjones7458 *This.* Vox and much of the left only have this energy when it comes to Republican states. I hear crickets about gerrymandering whenever CA or NY are brought up.
@xxseesxx9234 Жыл бұрын
america is still a dystopia and 2 people of the law who dont vote aginst justice doesnt change my mind
@enderkatze6129 Жыл бұрын
Let's see what map they Change it to
TheSoul Music Jam
Рет қаралды 24 МЛН
Insider News
Рет қаралды 3,8 МЛН