Supreme Court Needs a Clock |
Video: Global Warming Lorem Ipsum Dolor Sit ...
Article: Global Warming Lorem Ipsum Dolor Sit ...
Article: Global Warming Lorem Ipsum Dolor Sit ...
Entry: Global Warming Lorem Ipsum Dolor Sit ...
Video: Global Warming Lorem Ipsum Dolor Sit ...
The Supreme Court decides cases. But it also decides when to decide them – and that timing can be just as consequential as the ruling itself.
Now we have a real-world example.
In a closely watched decision last week, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Louisiana’s creation of a second majority-black congressional district violated the Constitution, holding that race cannot be used too heavily in drawing political maps, even to comply with the Voting Rights Act.
Reasonable people can agree with that conclusion. The Constitution promises equal protection under the law, and the idea that race should not dominate redistricting decisions is consistent with that principle. For years, the court has struggled to reconcile the Voting Rights Act with the Equal Protection Clause. This ruling moves that balance in a more colorblind direction.
But the substance of the ruling is only part of the story.
The timing matters too.
The case was argued twice – first in March 2025 and again in October – and for months it sat undecided, even as the justices’ questioning during oral arguments suggested that a conservative majority was likely to strike down race-driven congressional districts. Some observers questioned whether the delay reflected more than ordinary deliberation, given how the timing of the ruling could affect the current election cycle. But whatever the reason, states were left waiting, unsure how the law would ultimately be interpreted.
Meanwhile, political calendars did not stop. In an unusual step, both Republican- and Democrat-led legislatures have been working to redraw congressional maps mid-decade, partly in response to political pressure from President Trump. But they could........