this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024

152 points (99.4% liked)

politics

18043 readers

3141 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

152

Supreme court declines to take up case alleging voter discrimination in Georgia: Public service commission, which regulates & sets rates for utilities, accused of disenfranchising Black voters (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by [email protected] to c/politics

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The commission has five members, each elected to represent one of five districts in Georgia. But elections for each seat are decided in a statewide vote; though the commissioners must live in the district they represent, a voter in Savannah or Augusta has as much say over the commissioner representing Atlanta as a voter who lives there.

By saying it would not consider the plaintiffs’ appeal, the supreme court let stand an appellate court decision that said Georgia’s statewide elections for local districts on the rate-setting body is constitutional.

top 8 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] xantoxis 29 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

If you're going to report on a Supreme Court's failure to consider a case, I'm begging you, tell us in the headline what the appellate decision was. Don't make us dig 10 paragraphs down to find out whether the case was decided for or against.

(Since I don't want to do the exact same thing: The appellate decision held that the commission could continue to be elected by a statewide, rather than a region-by-region vote. This is equivalent to letting voters in Texas have a say in who California's senators should be.)

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer 26 points 3 days ago (1 children)

From the article:

The commission has five members, each elected to represent one of five districts in Georgia. But elections for each seat are decided in a statewide vote; though the commissioners must live in the district they represent, a voter in Savannah or Augusta has as much say over the commissioner representing Atlanta as a voter who lives there.

Yeah, that's a lot of bullshit.

[–] NateNate60 -1 points 2 days ago

This is not different from five state-wide positions with a requirement that the candidates live in a specific region. It's weird but not particularly unfair.

It's just a matter of presentation.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The commission has five members, each elected to represent one of five districts in Georgia. But elections for each seat are decided in a statewide vote; though the commissioners must live in the district they represent, a voter in Savannah or Augusta has as much say over the commissioner representing Atlanta as a voter who lives there.

Whose dumbass idea was that?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

The system was set up using statewide election of 5 commissioners 1907, when the Georgia State Legislature was doing things like passing things like the Felder-Williams Disenfranchisement Act to strip African-Americans of the right to vote. In 2000, they set up districts, but preserved the statewide-election thing.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Thanks!

[–] homesweethomeMrL 7 points 3 days ago

Justice “No Votes For You!” Roberts strikes again

[–] MeekerThanBeaker 2 points 2 days ago

The heck is Santa doing there in the off-season? Shouldn't he be sipping on piña coladas on some beach in the South Pacific?