216
SCOTUS Cobbles Together Excuse to Let Alabama Discriminate Against Black Voters in New Order
(talkingpointsmemo.com)
They don’t fear the populace nearly enough
this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
216 points (100.0% liked)
politics
29964 readers
2148 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Why should they? We’ve given them no reason to fear us. My district can’t even vote out our congressman who is owned by Israel and AI companies, we definitely can’t organize a movement large enough to threaten the Supreme Court.
We need 13 judges and term limits yesterday.
2 years ago.
And fuck the assholes who were like “but we have to play by the rules or they won’t!” Cuz they haven’t been for decades.
The current situation came from using "norms" instead of "laws with actual enforcement mechanisms" in politics. There's probably no saving those norms anymore, they'll have to be reforged as laws.
Term limits would require a Constitutional amendment. That's a generational project.
The corruption in this court will consume it. For example, it's only a matter of time before a POTUS realizes that the immunity granted by the court could be used to legally assassinate judges who rule against you. Why add to the court when you can subtract?
Wasn't there a way to effectively impose term limits by placing judges on a backup list where they stay for life after they have done a fixed number of years?
The immunity isn't some absolute rule; I don't seriously expect that the Republicans on the court think it applies to Democrats.
The same fucking map that called unconstitutional like 10 years ago? Their name will go down on history as next to trump as the worst America had to offer.
Most corrupt decades in history
Looking forward to the Scotus opinion that simply says "White Power!" signed by Uncle Clarence.
"Cobbles together" is exactly the right phrase here.
At this point (and not really coincidentally) the SC is pretty much like most of the blindly partisan assholes one might encounter online. They rather obviously don't analyze facts and arrive at conclusions - instead, they start with a preferred conclusion, then assemble whatever rhetoric, diversions, fallacies and bullshit might seem to maybe sort of justify it.
If the US was a place of sanity and order, they'd be impeached, disbarred and denied every benefit of their (former) positions, since they're brazenly violating every single oath they've ever sworn.
Guillotines were used in the french revolution.
They have opened an obvious side door. By utilizing "presumption of legislative good faith" in their rulling, for a case where it is demonstrably obvious that the legislator was not operating in good faith, they give a future court a super easy out for overturning this, and a whole lot of other rulings.
Now overall, they have a tiny point. Proving intent is hard most of the time. And the reality is that the voting rights act is extremely tough to enforce. Soo much so that it probably shouldn't exist. Further, without it, the current system can't possibly be fair. So that leads to what seems obvious to all of us. The system where the state legislature decides the map needs to be abolished. They have neither good faith, nor intent to represent the will of the population.
The whole concept of districts just doesn't work at the current scale. The idea was that the representative actually knew the people they represented, and could make decisions based on what those people wanted. But at the scale we are now, there is no chance of that. Nor that a given district even has a cohesive opinion on most subjects.
We need to do away with districts, and represent people opinions, not where they live.