In recent election cycles, a new power dynamic has driven Democrats to victory and captured the attention of those who track voting patterns: the “blueing” of the suburbs.
Around major metropolitan areas in key states, the suburbs swung hard for Democrats — particularly in 2020 — emerging as a decisive voting force.
There are multiple contributing factors to this shift, but one undeniable piece is the diversification of communities that once were almost entirely white.
“The truth is, a lot of minority groups are not as urban-centric as they historically have been,” Adam Podowitz-Thomas, senior legal strategist at the Princeton Gerrymandering Project, told TPM.
“Particularly looking at Latino populations, they are not actually as clustered in specifically urban places as, historically, Black populations have been,” he added. “And Black communities are moving to the suburbs too.”
That migration raises a tantalizing prospect for Democrats: a dynamic in places like Georgia and Pennsylvania where the city strongholds are ringed with multiracial communities composed of voters who traditionally vote blue.
But Democrats’ dream is Republicans’ target. As red states have sliced and diced centers of Democratic power in this round of redistricting, advocacy groups, individual voters and even the United States government have called foul in lawsuits challenging the gerryrigged maps.
One of the major ones, Georgia NAACP v. Raffensperger, accuses the state of purposefully attacking these emergent multiracial coalitions to diffuse their power.
“The Controlling Party’s lawmakers and their map drawers diluted the voting strength of Black, Latinx, and AAPI voters in specific regions described in this Complaint, particularly in areas that witnessed significant growth of communities of color in the past decade, packing or cracking communities of color into districts,” the Georgia NAACP writes.
It’s a different flavor of racial gerrymandering from cases centering on a single minority groups, which have also triggered a flood of lawsuits.
In cases like this one, experts expect red states to challenge whether these multiracial coalitions are protected under the Voting Rights Act — a question without a clear legal answer. Some circuit courts — including the 5th and 11th, which rule over politically important southern states like Georgia and Texas — have ruled that such coalitions are protected under the marquee, now gutted, voting law; another court said they’re not. Many, including the Supreme Court, are silent on the issue.
“There are going to be aggressive arguments about whether minority coalition districts are covered,” Michael Li, senior counsel at NYU’s Brennan Center for Justice, said. “Those voters could be in for a world of hurt.”
As of now, there’s no legal consensus on whether a coalition of minority groups can be a plaintiff in a VRA lawsuit.
The coalition, among other things, would have to satisfy the requirement that its members vote cohesively. To show a minority group’s voting preferences in the first place requires some extrapolation, since ballots are, of course, secret. But it’s easier to draw a conclusion if you have a district that’s almost completely composed of one minority group.
In coalitions, each minority group might only make up 10 or 15 percent of the district, making it harder to prove how any one group votes.
And some voting rights groups are nervous to even try to bring a coalition challenge given the foreboding silence of the very conservative Supreme Court. With the VRA already in tatters, some are wary to give the Court another chance to rip away more of its protections.
“There seems to be consensus that conservative judges are less likely to accept coalitional claims,” Douglas Spencer, associate professor at the University of Colorado Law School, told TPM. “There’s a concern that you could go to the Supreme Court and lose.”
Whether or not these coalitions have legal protections matters immensely in the many places where one minority group is not large enough to make up the majority of voters in the district.
“As people migrate out to the suburbs, there’s usually not a large enough population of any one racial group to really bring a successful VRA claim,” Spencer said.
But combining the groups into a minority coalition could surpass that majority threshold — and become even more of a powerful force.
“You can see it in the suburbs of Atlanta,” Spencer added. “There’s not enough Black movement out of the city yet to create a majority Black seat. But if you put it together with the Hispanic community, you might just get there.”
Anything that comes to Robert’s court that upholds VRA will be voted out. Robert began his legal career under Regan as point man to do just that. Nothing has changed he will completely neuter VRA.
Demographics is destiny.
But the issue of Gerrymandering will remain until Dem voters get serious with down ticket and statewide offices. Having courts backstop egregious maps is but a start. The real work will be in winning state assemblies in blue and purple rich states.
Awkward headline. I think the point is that the population growth of minorities in the South has reached the tipping point to where the Republicans can’t effectively gerrymander districts without imposing an illegal racial gerrymander. They are dependent on rogue, ideological judges to simply ignore the law and precedent on the books and there are signs that there may not be enough such judges to do that.
What does that mean? In the best case scenario for the country (and the Dems) the Dems would end up with nearly 240 seats that Biden won in 2020 in the new congressional map. Right now, Ds are trending towards 230-233 (again a product of demographic and coalition change). However, the Alabama case that was decided in favor of the plaintiffs where the court has required that a 2nd black majority district be redrawn could be the trigger that topples the GOP’s racist wall in the south and turns the region blue.
The SCOTUS will have the final say on the AL case, but it should be decided quickly. The GOP has committed a blatant violation of the voting rights act by drawing an impermissible gerrymander in the opinion of the lower court. That panel included 2 Trumper judges.
If the SCOTUS overturns the decision, it would essentially have to overturn the voting rights act in its entirety, and while that would be a temporary blow, it will not stop the march of the new coalition to dominance b/c the GOP doesn’t have the numbers. Overturning the voting rights act would be an extreme move that this court is fully capable of, but it’s something that I think Roberts will be wary of and will counsel his cohorts not to do it.
If SCOTUS upholds the decision, then that decision will be applied to North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, Texas (and possibly, Tennessee), Dems would probably gain another seat in each of these states and that would push the Dems up to around the 240 mark, which is about the number of seats they held after the 2018 election.
Amazing the casual nature of our narrative describing people who wish to take away the vote of their fellow citizens because of race, color, ethnicity.
(1) The practice is wrong
(2) The casual, blase nature of accepting it is wrong
In MO they are trying to move the state from 6-2 to 7-1 by erasing Emanuel Cleaver’s seat over in KC.
And daaaamn!, the MO State website still list Lacy Clay Jr as a US Representative.