The Supreme Court has refused a plea from Democratic Party lawyers, at least for now, to rein in alleged “racial gerrymandering” by Republican-led states in the South that protects black lawmakers at the expense of other Democrats.
The case of Bethune-Hill vs. Virginia highlighted the dilemma faced by Democrats who complain they wield little power in many states because of gerrymandering by Republicans. In response, however, Republicans sometimes point to the Voting Rights Act and argue they must concentrate black voters into a small number of black-majority districts. The law has been interpreted to mean states may not backtrack or retreat in the number of elected black or Latino lawmakers.
While these black-majority districts reliably elect black Democrats, they also may help Republicans win more seats in the adjoining areas.
Last year, Democratic lawyers appealed to the high court, arguing Virginia’s Republican leaders had engaged in unconstitutional racial gerrymandering in 2011 when they drew 12 state house districts with a 55% black majority. They urged the court to rule that the use of such racial targets in drawing districts violated the Constitution
In Wednesday’s opinion, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said the court was uncomfortable with such racial line-drawing, but it nonetheless may be needed to protect the seats of black legislators.
“The state did have good reasons under these circumstances” to set a racial threshold for some districts, he said.
“Holding otherwise would afford state legislatures too little breathing room, leaving them trapped between the competing hazards of liability under the Voting Rights Act and the equal protection clause” of the Constitution.
Kennedy described how a Republican leader and a black lawmaker worked together in drawing the districts. The “55% criterion emerged from certain members of the House Black Caucus and the leader of the redistricting effort in the House,” he wrote. The final redistricting plan had “broad support from both parties,” he added.