Virginia's map just got struck down. Is California next?
California's "mapmaker" drew its new maps to "ensure" that racially gerrymandered "VRA seats are bolstered in order to make them most effective." That's illegal under Callais.
@AAGDhillon: Here's how we can do it. 🧵
California state law requires an "independent" Commission to draw its district maps.
But Newsom and state Legislature Dems overrode the Commission last year to gerrymander.
That meant hiring a "mapmaker"—Paul Mitchell—to do it.
But he drew an illegal racial gerrymander.
Before SCOTUS's recent Callais decision, courts interpreted the VRA to effectively *require* racial quotas in gerrymandering.
As Justice Thomas explained, that was “repugnant to any nation that strives for the ideal of a color-blind Constitution.”
SCOTUS therefore corrected its VRA jurisprudence to align it with our color-blind Constitution:
Gerrymandering may only consider race in order to undo a prior racial gerrymander--no more racial quotas.
Callais means states can no longer use the VRA as an excuse to draw districts to advantage some races over others.
Instead, the standard constitutional prohibition on racial gerrymandering applies.
Here's how the Court explained that standard works in a prior case:
California's gerrymander flunks that constitutional test.
First, we know that "race was the predominant factor motivating" various districts because California's "mapmaker" expressly said so.
Second, Callais says that simply invoking the VRA is not a valid reason to use race.
While the circumstantial evidence that California used race to draw the districts is strong, the direct evidence is even clearer.
That's because the state's mapmaker said his "number one" priority was creating a new "Latino majority" district.
Seriously. He actually said that.
If that wasn't enough, the mapmaker then bragged about racial gerrymandering on social media.
He boasted that he drew the map to "increase Latino voting power" and add "one more Latino influence district."
That's a clear admission of unconstitutionally racial gerrymandering.
How did the mapmaker and state legislators justify California's racial gerrymander?
By invoking the VRA!
This is exactly what Callais prohibits: using the VRA as a pretext to racially gerrymander to advantage one race over others.
Democrats are obsessed with dividing Americans by race.
That's why enforcing the SFFA v. Harvard ruling that affirmative action is unconstitutional has required more litigation--including by DOJ.
Callais will require the same type of litigation push.
Mohsen Mahdawi, a 34 year old at Columbia University who spent 15 YEARS as an undergrad student, is on his way to being deported back to his native Jordan.
These "forever students" show a MASSIVE loophole in our system. 🧵
Foreign nationals on F-1 visas staying enrolled 15-25+ years to live here indefinitely.
Thousands of foreign "students" who entered 2000-2010 STILL have active F-1 status as of 2025.
This is ridiculous and must end.
DHS calls them exactly that: "forever" students, perpetually enrolled to remain in the U.S.
No repeated vetting. Weak oversight.
Past admins let this drag on since the 1970s "duration of status" rule.
Victory. No more taxpayer-backed home loans for illegal aliens.
This is one of those things you can't believe was actually happening.
American citizens are struggling to buy homes while mass migration drives up prices and strains the housing supply. 🧵
Mass migration is driving up home prices: HUD report shows foreign-born residents fueled over half of owner-occupied housing growth in CA & NY, spiking costs for American buyers.
This move by @SecretaryTurner ends American taxpayers paying for housing for illegals.
Illegal aliens were never eligible, but the Biden administration bent the rules.
Secretary Turner is fixing it with audits and DHS checks. Americans who play by the rules, stay prioritized.
The Trump Administration just declared the EEOC’s disparate-impact regime unconstitutional.
Disparate impact forced employers to trade neutral standards for racial quotas.
This is a direct strike on one of the Left’s favorite tools for forcing racial outcomes through law.
For decades, disparate impact let our managerial elite treat neutral standards as suspect if they produced the “wrong” racial numbers.
It banned things like background checks, aptitude tests, knowledge exams, hiring screens, and merit-based selection.
That regime is over.
OLC’s conclusion is clear: EEOC’s Title VII guidelines are unconstitutional because they impose liability based on disparate outcomes alone and pressure employers into race-based decision making.
According to the Public Interest Legal Foundation, its client is challenging the Illinois Voting Rights Act of 2011’s redistricting mandates under the Fifteenth Amendment and federal Voting Rights Act.
That is exactly the kind of litigation Callais invites.
Illinois did not hide the ball.
When Gov. Pritzker signed the maps, he invoked the Illinois Voting Rights Act and praised redistricting plans designed to preserve “clusters of minority voters” with “collective electoral power.”