In a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Alito, the Supreme Court sided with the Republican-controlled South Carolina legislature in a case challenging the recently drawn redistricting maps, which were alleged to be racially gerrymandered. Alito wrote that the plaintiffs had failed to prove that the legislature was motivated by race rather than partisanship and that courts should presume that legislatures act in good faith. Thomas, in his concurring opinion, argued that the Brown v. Board of Education decision went too far and introduced an ‘extravagant’ use of judicial power. He stated that the Constitution does not authorize courts to engage in race-based reasoning in voting matters and that such issues should be left to the political branches of government. Thomas also criticized the Court’s jurisprudence on redistricting, arguing that it puts states in a ‘lose-lose’ situation and has led to years of litigation with little to show for it. The liberal justices, on the other hand, praised the Brown v. Board of Education decision and argued that it was necessary to overcome the widespread resistance to desegregation at the time. They also criticized Thomas’s concurrence, arguing that it would weaken voting rights protections for minorities. The Supreme Court’s decisions on redistricting and civil rights are likely to continue to be debated in the years to come.
Supreme Court Justices Clash over Gerrymandering and Civil Rights Decisions
