Both the U.S. Supreme Court and the Congressional Black Caucus
(CBC) claim to advocate minority political interests, yet they
disagree over the intent and scope of the Voting Rights Act (VRA),
as well as the interpretation of the equal protection clause of the
14th Amendment. Whereas the Court promotes color-blind policies,
the CBC advocates race-based remedies. Setting this debate in the
context of the history of black political thought, Rivers examines
a series of high-profile districting cases, from "Rodgers v. Lodge"
(1982) through "NAMUDNO v. Holder" (2009). She evaluates the
competing approaches to racial equality and concludes,
surprisingly, that an originalist, race-conscious interpretation of
the 14th Amendment, along with a revised states' rights position
regarding electoral districting, may better serve minority
political interests.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!