Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
A voter exits a polling station in Selma, Alabama.
SCOTUS backs Voting Rights Act
In a surprising decision on Thursday, the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of voting rights advocates, deciding — in a 5-to-4 vote — that Alabama has carved up the congressional map to dilute the power of Black voters.
What’s this case about? After conducting the census in 2020, the deep-red state left only one out of seven districts majority Black despite the fact that Black voters make up 27% of the vote statewide.
A lower appeals court had previously ruled against Alabama, saying the map needed to be redrawn to be more favorable to Black residents. SCOTUS, for its part, last year put its decision on hold, meaning that the US midterm elections were held according to this now-defunct gerrymandered map.
Indeed, the outcome — in which Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts, two conservatives, sided with the court’s three liberal justices — surprised many who feared that the majority-conservative court might back Republican-dominated states trying to strip back the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination in voting.
Still, in handing down his decision, Roberts wrote that there were remaining concerns that the original law in question “may impermissibly elevate race in the allocation of political power within the States.” But for now, it sets a precedent for other states trying to pull similar tricks.
Want to learn more? Tune in here to Ian Bremmer’s interview with Yale Law School Senior Research Fellow Emily Bazelon on the latest episode of GZERO World. Bazelon, the host of Slate’s Political Gabfest podcast, unpacks some of the big cases argued before the court this term.
Clarence Page: Why Black voting rights matter
When the 1965 Voting Rights Act was passed, Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Clarence Page had just finished high school.
This legislation changed the lives of Black people in America because Jim Crow laws had virtually prevented Blacks from voting in the South with impossible poll questions and literacy tests, he said in an interview with Ian Bremmer on GZERO World.
But the Supreme Court gutted the law in 2013, allowing states to pass new voting legislation that progressives say restricts Black access to the ballot box.
The 2022 midterm elections will be the first major test of these laws — which Democrats in Congress are unlikely to be able to stop. How will this all affect Black turnout in November?
Page explains that if Trump loyalists win in key states, their legislatures — not voters — may end up deciding the next US presidential race.
What may happen in 2024 reminds him of 1876, when the end of Reconstruction after the Civil War, along with a disputed presidential election, ushered in the Jim Crow laws that ended ability to vote in Alabama.
Page asks, “Are we going to get rid of these last vestiges of discrimination from the Jim Crow era?"
Critical race theory and Black voting rights
Did conservative backlash against critical race theory influence Republican-led US states to pass new voting laws restricting Black Americans' access to the ballot box?
Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Clarence Page thinks so, to a certain extent, he tells Ian Bremmer on GZERO World.
Anything that looks like Black history or that makes white children feel bad, he says, has been inaccurately labeled as critical race theory and presented as a danger, motivating a lot of voters to get rid of it — for instance through voter suppression.
For Page, it's ironic that some in the party of Abraham Lincoln are now fighting those old Civil War battles again as far as democracy is concerned.
Watch this episode of GZERO World with Ian Bremmer: Black voter suppression in 2022
Trump's 2024 strategy could echo the disputed US election of 1876
For Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Clarence Page, new voting laws in some Republican-led states could help Donald Trump do in 2024 what he failed to do in 2020.
The changes, he says in a GZERO World interview, will make it easier for state legislatures to decide electoral college votes. That's exactly what Trump's people tried to do in the last presidential election.
It reminds Page of what happened in 1876, when the end of Reconstruction after the Civil War coincided with a disputed presidential election.
The outcome? Jim Crow.
"This is the legacy of, of those days," he says. "A that's part of the big argument now. Are we going to get rid of these last vestiges of discrimination from the Jim Crow era?"
Watch this episode of GZERO World with Ian Bremmer: Black voter suppression in 2022
- The history of Black voting rights in America - GZERO Media ›
- The Supreme Court's role on Black voting rights - GZERO Media ›
- Jon Lieber: What's different about the 2022 midterms is 2024 Trump ... ›
- The future of January 6 - GZERO Media ›
- Japan's assertive foreign and economic policy reflect Abe's legacy - GZERO Media ›
- Trump's 2024 outlook: impact of Jan. 6 hearings ›
- Trump's 2024 outlook: more vulnerable after Jan 6 hearings - GZERO Media ›
- Trump FBI raid: Defund the FBI is the new stop the steal - GZERO Media ›
- Biden vs. MAGA Republicans - GZERO Media ›
The Supreme Court’s role on Black voting rights
When the 1965 Voting Rights Act was passed, Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Clarence Page had just finished high school. This legislation changed the lives of Black people in America because Jim Crow laws had virtually prevented Blacks from voting in the South, he said in an interview with Ian Bremmer on GZERO World.
But in 2013, the Supreme Court gutted the law by taking away pre-clearance for states, which had blocked states — especially the former Confederate ones — from changing their voting laws based on racial discrimination.
At the time of the SCOTUS ruling, Chief Justice John Roberts said pre-clearance wasn't needed anymore. But many disagree.
Now, Page says Republicans tend to benefit from making it harder to vote, while Democrats want to make it easier.
"We're getting right at the heart of what democracy is all about, when we're at loggerheads over who should be allowed to vote and, and who shouldn't."
Watch this episode of GZERO World with Ian Bremmer: Black voter suppression in 2022
Black voter suppression in 2022
Until the 1965 Voting Rights Act, Black people in America who wanted to vote faced impossible poll questions and literacy tests. But the Supreme Court gutted the law in 2013, allowing states to pass new voting legislation that progressives say restrict Black access to the ballot box.
The 2022 midterm elections will be the first major test of these laws — which Democrats in Congress are unlikely to be able to stop. How will this all affect Black turnout in November?
On this episode of GZERO World, Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Clarence Page tells Ian Bremmer that if Trump loyalists win in key states, their legislatures — not voters — may end up deciding the next US presidential race.What may happen in 2024 reminds him of 1876, when Page says the end of Reconstruction after the Civil War, along with a disputed presidential election, ushered in the Jim Crow laws that ended his ancestors' ability to vote in Alabama.
What's driving all this? For Page, part of the problem is the grievance narrative around critical race theory, which has made some Americans confused between being a Democrat and being democratic.
Still, he says you can't deny that Republicans want to make it harder to vote, while Democrats try to make it easier. That's a big problem because "we're at loggerheads over who should be allowed to vote and, and who shouldn't."
Page also compares President Biden's pledge to nominate a Black woman to fill Justice Breyer's seat on the Supreme Court to Ronald Reagan's decision to pick Sandra Day O'Connor. And as a bonus, Ian looks back at the history of Black women judges in America.
- Voting reform bill will likely be blocked, but still a key issue for ... ›
- Voting reform bill stalls in Congress, frustrating Democrats - GZERO ... ›
- The history of Black voting rights in America - GZERO Media ›
- Counter narrative: Black Americans, the 1619 Project, and Nikole ... ›
- Why do Black people feel "erased" from American history? - GZERO ... ›