News-Record.com

The U.S. Supreme Court today backs a N.C. Supreme Court ruling in a voting rights case.

Justice Bob Edmunds of Greensboro wrote the majority opinion for the N.C. Supreme Court in Pender County v. Bartlett.

It hinges on the question of whether the Voting Rights Act requires so-called "majority minority" districts to ensure the election of minority candidates or whether "coalition" or "crossover" districts are sufficient. The latter two terms refer to districts where, say, only 40 percent of the voting-age population is black but enough white voters will cross over or form political coalitions to consistently elect black candidates.

The N.C. Supreme Court, by a 4-2 count in 2007, took the majority-minority position. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed by a 5-4 majority.

This has political ramifications. If the General Assembly, when it redraws legislative districts after the 2010 census, must make sure half the voting population of intended minority districts actually is minority, that probably will create more odd-looking gerrymanders and have the effect of draining adjoining districts of minority voters, leaving them a little more white and maybe more Republican.

(Hint: The state and federal justices supporting the 50 percent threshold in this case are conservatives and/or Republicans.)

But, never mind the details. To me, the real issue here is how outdated this whole discussion is.

Check out the occupant of the White House. He wasn't elected from a majority-minority district, or even by an electorate that would pass Voting Rights Act scrutiny as a crossover or coalition district.

Except, millions of white voters did cross over racial lines and form a coalition with black voters to elect the nation's first African-American president.

The same thing happened in other races on Guilford County ballots. We're really getting past the time when black candidates can't win unless they run in a largely black district.

Except for candidates who want to run on a racial agenda.

That goes for white and black candidates.

These districts are literally drawing racial boundaries on the map, creating what Sandra Day O'Connor once said resembled political apartheid.

It just becomes more convoluted and confusing when the Supreme Court has to weigh in on exactly what percentage of a district's population has to be minority.

I wish this decision could be met with enough skepticism to force Congress to say: "This just doesn't make sense anymore. Let's do away with these provisions and trust the American people to elect their representatives based on qualifications and ideas, not skin color."

Does Congress really want to say no to that?

The U.S. Supreme Court opinion is Bartlett v. Strickland