Is the SCOTUS becoming more racist and homophobic?

[WisconIndependent]

Supreme Court raises the stakes in a Louisiana redistricting case

The court ordered new briefing, suggesting it could be poised to further weaken the landmark Voting Rights Act.

www.nbcnews.com

We know in the upcoming decision regarding redistricting in Louisiana, the court will more than likely eliminate the need to safeguard minority districts as they have already made political gerrymandering just fine. Is this a case of racism, where the court can end any hope of those "minorities" right to have voting power. And now the court has taken up the case involving gay marriage. Will they overturn another precedent and leave gay marriage up to the states, showing a clear case of their homophobic religious attitudes rather than protect another minority. It would create as it has with abortion, a case of chaos in the country with one state recognizing the marriages and another not recognizing them, and the implications for the Federal government and taxes and such. And would the GOP, which controls congress, make gay marriage illegal as in the past? So, we seem to have the present SCOTUS that welcomes moves toward a more racist and homophobic society with their blessing.

 

[NatMorton]

We know in the upcoming decision regarding redistricting in Louisiana, the court will more than likely eliminate the need to safeguard minority districts as they have already made political gerrymandering just fine.

Are "minority districts" often not the product of gerrymandering?

 

[NWRatCon]

Supreme Court raises the stakes in a Louisiana redistricting case

The court ordered new briefing, suggesting it could be poised to further weaken the landmark Voting Rights Act.

www.nbcnews.com

We know in the upcoming decision regarding redistricting in Louisiana, the court will more than likely eliminate the need to safeguard minority districts as they have already made political gerrymandering just fine. Is this a case of racism, where the court can end any hope of those "minorities" right to have voting power. And now the court has taken up the case involving gay marriage. Will they overturn another precedent and leave gay marriage up to the states, showing a clear case of their homophobic religious attitudes rather than protect another minority. It would create as it has with abortion, a case of chaos in the country with one state recognizing the marriages and another not recognizing them, and the implications for the Federal government and taxes and such. And would the GOP, which controls congress, make gay marriage illegal as in the past? So, we seem to have the present SCOTUS that welcomes moves toward a more racist and homophobic society with their blessing.

In short, yes.

 

[WisconIndependent]

Are "minority districts" often not the product of gerrymandering?

I do not know if you have ever had anything to do with districting, I have. One of the things you look at is getting likes together. Like you would not cut up a city into many districts that have nothing in common just for politics. Like adding the pie shaped city cutouts with outlying suburbs just to take away any of the power of the city people.

 

[Athanasius68]

Supreme Court raises the stakes in a Louisiana redistricting case

The court ordered new briefing, suggesting it could be poised to further weaken the landmark Voting Rights Act.

www.nbcnews.com

We know in the upcoming decision regarding redistricting in Louisiana, the court will more than likely eliminate the need to safeguard minority districts as they have already made political gerrymandering just fine. Is this a case of racism, where the court can end any hope of those "minorities" right to have voting power. And now the court has taken up the case involving gay marriage. Will they overturn another precedent and leave gay marriage up to the states, showing a clear case of their homophobic religious attitudes rather than protect another minority. It would create as it has with abortion, a case of chaos in the country with one state recognizing the marriages and another not recognizing them, and the implications for the Federal government and taxes and such. And would the GOP, which controls congress, make gay marriage illegal as in the past? So, we seem to have the present SCOTUS that welcomes moves toward a more racist and homophobic society with their blessing.

It would seem that the above hypothetical problems belong with the elected and politically accountable Article I and Article II branches.
They should not be a concern of Article III.

But rather than dealing with gossip, why not simply deal with the constitutional issues the court is wrestling with on its own merits?