[Ads-l] "You are evidently _de-synthesized_ to it."

[Dan Goncharoff]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965#Racial_gerrymandering

While Section 2 and Section 5 prohibit jurisdictions from drawing electoral
districts that dilute the votes of protected minorities, the Supreme Court
has held that in some instances, the Equal Protection Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment prevents jurisdictions from drawing district lines to
favor protected minorities. The Court first recognized the justiciability
of affirmative "racial gerrymandering" claims in Shaw v. Reno (1993).

DanG

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 4:35 PM, James A. Landau <JJJRLandau at netscape.com>
wrote:

> On  Thu, 13 Apr 2017 at 18:20:04 Zone-0400 Wilson Gray <hwgray at GMAIL.COM>
> wrote:
>
> >Sarcastic response by "Fuerza" to "JMar," who asserts that there no
> >longer exists any discrimination in the U.S.
>
> This leads into a pet peeve of mine, namely that people use the word
> "postracial" as if it were a binary term, that is, the United States is
> either postracial or it is not.
>
> "Postracial" should be a quantitative term, to be expressed in percent.
> One should say "the United States is 80 percent postracial" (or perhaps the
> correct figure is 20 percent; I won't argue).
>
> Amidst the ton of political e-mails I get every day, there are ones
> denouncing the Republicans for race-based gerrymandering.  I expect that
> soon the courts will be hearing cases about gerrymandering for the purposes
> of racial discrimination.  Very far from 100 percent postracial.
>
> - Jim Landau
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Netscape.  Just the Net You Need.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org