

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
A federal court on Tuesday agreed with the Department of Justice that redistricted voter maps in Texas did not comply with the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and that the effort by the Republican-controlled state legislature was an attempt to deprive or diminish the ability of minorities -- most Latinos -- of their right to an election free of racial discrimination.
Three separate maps, for new districts for the US House and the Texas Senate and House, violated the Voting Rights Act, according to the three-judge panel of the US District Court in Washington, DC, because they "have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color, or language minority group."
The changes to the Texas voting maps were spurred by large population growth in the state over the last ten years. According to census data, population grew by almost 4 million people, mostly driven by rising number of Latinos which accounted for nearly two-thirds of the growth. And the overall total of that increase, according to The Nation, "nearly 90 percent... came from minority citizens (65 percent Hispanic, 13 percent African-American, 10 percent Asian)."
But, as ThinkProgress explains:
when the Republican-controlled Legislature redrew the congressional map to create the new districts, minority Congress members saw their offices carved out of their districts, while white Congress members retained theirs. Judge Griffith found that "substantial surgery" was done to predominantly black districts to cut them off from their representatives' offices and their strongest fundraising bases, while the districts of white Congress members were either left untouched or were "redrawn to include particular country clubs and, in one case, the school belonging to the incumbent's grandchildren." Furthermore, black and Latino representatives were excluded from the map drawing process.
"The only explanation Texas offers for this pattern is 'coincidence.' But if this was coincidence, it was a striking one indeed," wrote US Circuit Judge Thomas Griffith in his opinion. "It is difficult to believe that pure chance would lead to such results."
"This is absolutely a victory for Texas and for minority voters to elect a candidate of their choice," Trey Martinez Fischer with the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, told the Houston Chronicle.
# # #
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
A federal court on Tuesday agreed with the Department of Justice that redistricted voter maps in Texas did not comply with the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and that the effort by the Republican-controlled state legislature was an attempt to deprive or diminish the ability of minorities -- most Latinos -- of their right to an election free of racial discrimination.
Three separate maps, for new districts for the US House and the Texas Senate and House, violated the Voting Rights Act, according to the three-judge panel of the US District Court in Washington, DC, because they "have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color, or language minority group."
The changes to the Texas voting maps were spurred by large population growth in the state over the last ten years. According to census data, population grew by almost 4 million people, mostly driven by rising number of Latinos which accounted for nearly two-thirds of the growth. And the overall total of that increase, according to The Nation, "nearly 90 percent... came from minority citizens (65 percent Hispanic, 13 percent African-American, 10 percent Asian)."
But, as ThinkProgress explains:
when the Republican-controlled Legislature redrew the congressional map to create the new districts, minority Congress members saw their offices carved out of their districts, while white Congress members retained theirs. Judge Griffith found that "substantial surgery" was done to predominantly black districts to cut them off from their representatives' offices and their strongest fundraising bases, while the districts of white Congress members were either left untouched or were "redrawn to include particular country clubs and, in one case, the school belonging to the incumbent's grandchildren." Furthermore, black and Latino representatives were excluded from the map drawing process.
"The only explanation Texas offers for this pattern is 'coincidence.' But if this was coincidence, it was a striking one indeed," wrote US Circuit Judge Thomas Griffith in his opinion. "It is difficult to believe that pure chance would lead to such results."
"This is absolutely a victory for Texas and for minority voters to elect a candidate of their choice," Trey Martinez Fischer with the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, told the Houston Chronicle.
# # #
A federal court on Tuesday agreed with the Department of Justice that redistricted voter maps in Texas did not comply with the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and that the effort by the Republican-controlled state legislature was an attempt to deprive or diminish the ability of minorities -- most Latinos -- of their right to an election free of racial discrimination.
Three separate maps, for new districts for the US House and the Texas Senate and House, violated the Voting Rights Act, according to the three-judge panel of the US District Court in Washington, DC, because they "have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color, or language minority group."
The changes to the Texas voting maps were spurred by large population growth in the state over the last ten years. According to census data, population grew by almost 4 million people, mostly driven by rising number of Latinos which accounted for nearly two-thirds of the growth. And the overall total of that increase, according to The Nation, "nearly 90 percent... came from minority citizens (65 percent Hispanic, 13 percent African-American, 10 percent Asian)."
But, as ThinkProgress explains:
when the Republican-controlled Legislature redrew the congressional map to create the new districts, minority Congress members saw their offices carved out of their districts, while white Congress members retained theirs. Judge Griffith found that "substantial surgery" was done to predominantly black districts to cut them off from their representatives' offices and their strongest fundraising bases, while the districts of white Congress members were either left untouched or were "redrawn to include particular country clubs and, in one case, the school belonging to the incumbent's grandchildren." Furthermore, black and Latino representatives were excluded from the map drawing process.
"The only explanation Texas offers for this pattern is 'coincidence.' But if this was coincidence, it was a striking one indeed," wrote US Circuit Judge Thomas Griffith in his opinion. "It is difficult to believe that pure chance would lead to such results."
"This is absolutely a victory for Texas and for minority voters to elect a candidate of their choice," Trey Martinez Fischer with the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, told the Houston Chronicle.
# # #