“A timely study of the Voting Rights Act’s legacy in Congress and the Supreme Court”

The following book announcement arrived via email (use Code “CBC” to buy book at 30% discount):

Both the U.S. Supreme Court and the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) claim to advocate minority political interests, yet they disagree over the intent and scope of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), as well as the interpretation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Whereas the Court promotes color-blind policies, the CBC advocates race-based remedies. Setting this debate in the context of the history of black political thought, in  The Congressional Black Caucus, Minority Voting Rights, and the U.S. Supreme Court Rivers examines a series of high-profile districting cases, from Rodgers v. Lodge (1982) through NAMUDNO v. Holder (2009). She evaluates the competing approaches to racial equality and concludes, surprisingly, that an originalist, race-conscious interpretation of the 14th Amendment, along with a revised states’ rights position regarding electoral districting, may better serve minority political interests.

Christina R. Rivers is Associate Professor of Political Science at DePaul University.

 

 

 

Share this: