Thread by @lekhashupeck

I'd like to explain further what I believe is the twisted, ridiculous theory that legislative leadership is using to subvert the requirements of the VRA, because I think I've finally figured it out.

https://twitter.com/lekhashupeck/status/1445397074896433166

Over the past couple of months we've heard the chairs of the redistricting committee say repeatedly that they won't use racial data in drawing districts. Which means that they will not make any effort to protect the ability of Black communities to have their votes count.

But... the Voting Rights Act is still good law, in some fashion, and there are circumstances under which districts need to be drawn in order to allow minority communities to elect a candidate of their choice.

The history of VRA litigation, in particular a case called Gingles v. Thornburg, says that you can draw a minority opportunity district when a few factors are met:

1. The racial or language minority group "sufficiently large and geographically compact to constitute a majority in a single-member district"

2. The minority group is "politically cohesive" (meaning its members tend to vote similarly); and...

3. The "majority votes sufficiently as a bloc to enable it ... usually to defeat the minority's preferred candidate."

So, when you meet those factors, plus have some evidence that proposed districts diminish the minority's ability to elect candidates of their choice, you can draw a minority opportunity district.

Basically this means that to figure out whether or not you should draw a VRA district, you have to do some actual analysis showing that it is necessary.

When drawing districts in 2011, the #NCGA did none of this. All they did was tell Dr. Hofeller to pack as many Black voters into as few districts as possible - and then they called the resulting districts "VRA districts" even though they had done NONE of the necessary analysis.

Here is what these so-called "VRA" districts looked like:

(Source: indyweek.com/news/northcaro…)

Not pretty, right?

Well, that's what you get when you tell your map drawer to draw as many districts as possible with "at least 50%-plus-one [Black Voting Age Population] BVAP."

What you also get is sued.

The Covington v. North Carolina case is the case that was brought against these districts, and they were ultimately thrown out and the legislature was forced to redraw them.

Why did the court throw them out? Well, in it's opinion the court said that: "Defendants have
not shown that their use of race to draw any of these districts
was narrowly tailored to further a compelling state interest...

my thread got disconnected - it continues here:

https://twitter.com/lekhashupeck/status/1445411595027374085

Having read that, is there ANY good faith reading that would lead you to the conclusion that there is no racially polarized voting in North Carolina, and therefore no need to draw VRA districts?

No, there is not.