During a hearing at the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) involving whether Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson seemed to liken black Americans to Americans with disabilities.
The case, known as Louisiana v. Callais, considers whether Louisiana’s congressional map — which includes two majority-black districts — violates the 15th Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Plaintiffs in the case argue that the congressional map is unconstitutionally gerrymandered based on race.
During the hearing, Justice Jackson seemed to contend that black American voters are equivalent to Americans with physical disabilities.
“So going back to this discriminatory intent point, I guess I’m thinking of it, of the fact that remedial action absent discriminatory intent is really not a new idea in the civil rights laws. And my kind of paradigmatic example of this is something like the ADA [Americans with Disabilities Act],” Jackson said.
She continued:
Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Act against the backdrop of a world that was generally not accessible to people with disabilities. And so it was discriminatory in effect because these folks were not able to access these buildings. And it didn’t matter whether the person who built the building or the person who owned the building intended for them to be exclusionary; that’s irrelevant. Congress said, the facilities have to be made equally open to people with disabilities if readily possible. I guess I don’t understand why that’s not what’s happening here. [Emphasis added]
The idea in Section 2 is that we are responding to current-day manifestations of past and present decisions that disadvantage minorities and make it so that they don’t have equal access to the voting system. Right? They’re disabled. In fact ,we use the word ‘disabled’ in [Milliken v. Bradley]. We say that’s a way in which these processes are not equally open. So I don’t understand why it matters whether the state intended to do that. What Congress is saying is if it is happening … you gotta fix it. [Emphasis added]
Lawyer Edward Greim responded to Jackson, saying, “The difference is that the remedy under the ADA and other anti-discrimination laws is not stereotype.”
“It’s not race-based. I take your point. I take your point. But you’re saying then that if the problem of no access is about race, it’s just too bad because you can’t have a remedy that relates to race,” Jackson replied, to which Greim said, “Absolutely not, your honor.”
“It’s not whether it relates to race,” Greim said. “It’s whether the remedy that relates to race involves stereotyping voters and making assumptions about their politics and their views and their thoughts based on their race and that’s the problem. It doesn’t exist in those other civil rights statutes.”
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
Read the full article here
