this post was submitted on 11 May 2026
258 points (99.2% liked)

politics

29715 readers
2773 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 63 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (2 children)

Last week, the court struck down a Louisiana congressional map with a second majority-Black district. The decision requires there to be evidence of intentional racism to prove that a map is discriminatory, making it nearly impossible to successfully challenge racial gerrymandering. 

6-3 decision along partisan lines

This is what you voted for protest-non-voters, 2016 edition.

[–] iknewitwhenisawit@fedinsfw.app 26 points 22 hours ago

Well... without Mitchell McConnell ignoring the Constitution to get two extra appointees for Trump 1, we might be at a 4-5 decision the other way...

[–] santa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Doesn’t this negate any map, then? This seems messed up on its face.

[–] joe@lemmy.world 9 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

It negates any map that was designed specifically to counteract racism, because considering racism is, by definition, taking race into account. (According to their logic)

Notably, specifically designing a district map to give a specific political party an edge is not illegal. This will be a race to the bottom and all voters should be pissed. The natural end result will be states with GOP-controlled legislature will craft maps such that only the GOP can win and Dems will have to do the same to even hope to keep the playing field level.

People all across the political spectrum will lose any chance at representation, depending on how their political leanings compare with the legislature of their state.

[–] santa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 hours ago

Thank you for explanation. It’s difficult to square away current maps that favor GQP and it not racially leaning.