Keep Up to Date with the Most Important News

By pressing the Subscribe button, you confirm that you have read and are agreeing to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
Sign Up

U.S. Supreme Court Delivers Blockbuster 2024 Election Ruling

The U.S. Supreme Court has reversed a lower federal court’s ruling regarding a newly drawn congressional map in a key state heading into the 2024 election.

This week, the court ruled 6-3 to toss out an appeals court ruling that said South Carolina’s congressional map was racially gerrymandered, the Washington Times reported. The “ruling upheld a map that was challenged by voter Taiwan Scott and the South Carolina NAACP, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and allied groups,” the outlet reported.

Republican state lawmakers had requested the high court to review a ruling from a three-judge district court panel, which had ordered South Carolina to redraw its 2022 congressional district map.

After a nine-day trial, a federal court ruled that South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District had been drawn to dilute Black votes. However, that ruling was put on hold pending further litigation.

The high court stated that the ruling lacked evidence, noting that the Black voting age population in the district remained around 17% despite an increase in the Republican voter majority, the Times reported. The justices concluded that partisan gerrymandering does not violate the Constitution as long as race is not the primary factor when drawing district lines.

“None of the facts on which the District Court relied to infer a racial motive is sufficient to support an inference that can overcome the presumption of legislative good faith,” wrote Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. for the majority. All of the court’s GOP-nominated justices agreed.

The three Democratic appointees dissented, arguing that because the district court’s analysis was thorough and the three-judge panel unanimously found that race was a motive in redrawing District 1, the lines should have to be redrawn.

“The proper response to this case is not to throw up novel roadblocks enabling South Carolina to continue dividing citizens along racial lines. It is to respect the plausible — no, the more than plausible — findings of the District Court that the state engaged in race-based districting.  And to tell the state that it must redraw District 1, this time without targeting African American citizens,” wrote Justice Elena Kagan, who was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson in the dissent.

The district is represented by Rep. Nancy Mace, a Republican.

In April, a federal appeals court with the 3rd Circuit sided with Republicans in a lawsuit targeting mail-in ballots in the crucial state of Pennsylvania. The three-judge panel overturned the order of a federal district court and ruled in favor of the Republican National Committee (RNC) regarding signature verification for mail-in voting.

According to NPR, the case revolved around whether mail-in ballots that were mailed on time but either had an incorrect date or no date at all under the voter’s signature should be counted.

Democrats contended that the Materiality Provision outlined in Section (a)(2)(B) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is applicable in this scenario, thereby asserting that the ballots should be counted.

The Materiality Provision prohibits denial of the right to vote because of an “error or omission” on paperwork “related to any application, registration, or other act requisite to voting,” if the mistake is “not material in determining whether [an] individual is qualified” to vote.

The RNC responded by arguing that enforcement of the date requirement for a ballot “does not impinge on the right to vote” because the Materiality Provision “only prohibits immaterial requirements affecting the qualification and registration of a voter,” not other, more specific requirements for casting a ballot, The Daily Wire reported.

Two of the three judges on the appeals panel, all of whom were appointed by Democrat presidents, agreed with Republicans.

RNC Chairman Michael Whatley responded to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals ruling: “This is a crucial victory for election integrity and voter confidence in the Keystone State and nationwide. Pennsylvanians deserve to feel confident in the security of their mail ballots, and this 3rd Circuit ruling roundly rejects unlawful left-wing attempts to count undated or incorrectly dated mail ballots.”

Ben Collis is a freelance journalist for the Trending Politico covering trending human interest/social media stories and the reactions real people have to them. He always seeks to incorporate evidence-based studies, current events, and facts pertinent to these stories to create your not-so-average viral post.
Ben Collis
Add a comment

Leave a Reply

Advertisement · Scroll to continue