The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Justice Thomas Concurs

Posted on | April 1, 2026 | Comments Off on Justice Thomas Concurs

The reaction of Democrats to the Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais reminded me of General Sherman who, in proposing his 1864 “March to the Sea,” vowed the he would “make Georgia howl.”

On TV and social media Wednesday, the howling from Democrats was deranged and incessant. From a conservative perspective, these reactions were as delicious as the “Tears of Unfathomable Sadness.” If ever anyone deserved to be miserable, certainly the Democratic Party does.

Among those vindicated by Wednesday’s ruling was my friend Professor Carol Swain, who had famously warned in the early 1990s that racial Gerrymandering — seeking to maximize the number of majority-black districts, in order to send more black representatives to Congress — would undermine the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives because, in the process, it would create majority white districts that favored Republicans. Swain’s warning was not heeded by Democrats, and when she was proven correct by the 1994 midterm landslide for Republicans, liberals never forgave her for being right.

The unhinged rage of Democrats after the Callais decision could be (or at least should be) silenced simply by posting the map of Louisiana’s 2nd and 6th districts, which was what brought the case to the Supreme Court.

It is an insult to defend such a map by shouting “RAAAAACISM” at anyone who criticizes it, which is the essence of the Democrats’ reaction. One wonders whether they are (a) so ignorant they don’t understand the law and the Constitution, or (b) so dishonest they think they can frighten people with their feigned outrage and false claims. Surely someone will add, (c) embrace the healing power of “and,” e.g., Chuck Schumer.

If any living man can be considered an authority on racism and Jim Crow, permit me to suggest that it’s not the Jew from Brooklyn, but rather the black man from Chatham County, Georgia:

This Court should never have interpreted [Section 2] of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to effectively give racial groups “an entitlement to roughly proportional representation.” … By doing so, the Court led legislatures and courts to “systematically divid[e] the country into electoral districts along racial lines.” Holder v. Hall, 512 U. S. 874, 905 (1994) (THOMAS, J., concurring in judgment). “Blacks [we]re drawn into ‘black districts’ and given ‘black representatives’; Hispanics [were] drawn into Hispanic districts and given ‘Hispanic representatives’; and so on.” Ibid. That interpretation rendered [Section 2] “repugnant to any nation that strives for the ideal of a color-blind Constitution.” Id., at 905–906. Today’s decision should largely put an end to this “disastrous misadventure” in voting-rights jurisprudence. Id., at 893.
As I explained more than 30 years ago, I would go further and hold that [Section 2] of the Voting Rights Act does not regulate districting at all. See id., at 922–923. The relevant text prohibits States from imposing or applying a “voting qualification,” “prerequisite to voting,” or “standard, practice, or procedure,” in a manner that results in a denial or abridgement of the right to vote based on race. … How States draw district lines does not fall within any of those three categories. Holder, 512 U. S., at 922–923 (opinion of THOMAS, J.); Allen v. Milligan, 599 U. S. 1, 46 (2023) (THOMAS, J., dissenting). The words in [Section 2] instead “reach only ‘enactments that regulate citizens’ access to the ballot or the processes for counting a ballot’; they ‘do not include a State’s . . . choice of one districting scheme over another.’” Ibid. (quoting Holder, 512 U. S., at 945 (opinion of THOMAS, J.)). Therefore, no [Section 2] challenge to districting should ever succeed.

It’s not really complicated, you see. Why is it that what is so obvious to Justice Thomas should be incomprehensible to Senator Schumer?



 

Category: Congress, Louisiana, Racism, Supreme Court

Comments

Comments are closed.