Republicans do place an enormous amount of weight on a statement by Paul Mitchell, a private consultant hired by Democrats to draw the California maps. After the maps were drawn, but before they were approved by the state’s voters, Mitchell told a Latino interest group that the new maps “will further increase Latino voting power,” that they add an additional “Latino influence district” (a district where Latinos are not in the majority but are nonetheless likely to elect their preferred candidate), and that they “ensure that the Latino districts are bolstered in order to make them most effective.”
Here’s the “evidence” that Dems racially gerrymandered California
It’s actually totally legal to gerrymander by party but it’s not by race so that’s the case right there
The applicable laws protect “language minorities” or discuss “race, color, or national origin.” The race vs ethnicity argument isn’t legally relevant since the scope is broader than that.
If it’s that they’re white and born in the USA, it doesn’t matter. If they’re Latino because of ancestry, it’s well established in US law that that’s covered by “national origin.” They’re still a protected group.
“Protected” from discrimination, etc. I understand what you mean. Maybe that’s not a great word to use in this case, but it’s not lawful to use that grouping method for these purposes — good or bad. It can (and has) been used to worsen such a demographic’s situation instead of help.
Here’s the “evidence” that Dems racially gerrymandered California
It’s actually totally legal to gerrymander by party but it’s not by race so that’s the case right there
Latino isn’t a race. It’s anyone from Latin America. It’s an ethnicity.
It’s not even an ethnicity. It’s bullshit.
The applicable laws protect “language minorities” or discuss “race, color, or national origin.” The race vs ethnicity argument isn’t legally relevant since the scope is broader than that.
Aren’t Latinos mostly white (christian) US-Americans?
Perhaps, but what are you getting at?
If it’s that they’re white and born in the USA, it doesn’t matter. If they’re Latino because of ancestry, it’s well established in US law that that’s covered by “national origin.” They’re still a protected group.
How are they being protected by preventing a representative be selected by them?
“Protected” from discrimination, etc. I understand what you mean. Maybe that’s not a great word to use in this case, but it’s not lawful to use that grouping method for these purposes — good or bad. It can (and has) been used to worsen such a demographic’s situation instead of help.
That may be so but it’s a race category of the US census so for legal purposes it’s a race
Racism surviving through sociology is the most annoying shit.
Problem is, we keep getting racists with power, often because other racists vote them into power.
We should do something about racists.
I’m not sure the current court has the integrity to understand that