Comment Section for Justices Poised to Restore Voting Map Ruled a Racial Gerrymander - The New York Times

This New York Times article discusses a Supreme Court case concerning a South Carolina voting map, which a lower court had ruled as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. It appears that the conservative majority of the Supreme Court may be willing to reinstate this map. The key issue in the case is the distinction between racial and partisan factors in drawing voting maps, a challenging task as black voters predominantly favor Democrats. The map in question was labeled unconstitutional as it was believed that race was the predominant factor in its creation, a violation of the Constitution's equal protection clause. However, the lawmakers involved deny using racial data, arguing that it is not a reliable predictor of partisan outcomes. The case, known as Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the N.A.A.C.P., has similarities to a previous case from Alabama where state lawmakers diluted the power of black voters in drawing a congressional voting map. However, the Alabama case was governed by the Voting Rights Act, while the South Carolina case is guided by the Constitution's equal protection clause. The Supreme Court justices are divided on the issue, with conservative justices suggesting that the lower court's findings were erroneous. The consensus is that the Supreme Court can only overturn the lower court's decision if it is deemed clearly erroneous. The final decision will have significant implications on the future of voting map drawing and the balance between racial and partisan factors in the process.