The Dictatorship
The Supreme Court has all but killed the law that helped kill Jim Crow
ByStacey Abrams
The Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais is a direct hit to the heart of the Voting Rights Act and to the fragile promise that every American’s vote should carry equal weight. The VRA ended Jim Crow. Full stop. With this decision, it’s open season — once again — on Black and brown voters at the ballot box.
In 2023, the Supreme Court instructed Alabama to finally draw fair maps to create two majority-Black constitutional districts to allow Black citizens a shot at equal representation. Today, that same Supreme Court ruled that Louisiana’s two majority-Black congressional districts are unconstitutional — and in doing so, gutted Section 2 of the VRA, opening the door to racial gerrymanders across the South and Southwest.
It’s open season — once again — on Black and brown voters at the ballot box.
Let’s first understand what the VRA is. After the Civil War, the 13th Amendment banned slavery (mostly). The 14th Amendment granted birthright citizenship (for now). And the 15th Amendment barred the federal government and the states from denying the right to vote based on race, color and servitude (in theory). But until the fairly recent year of 1965, the 15th Amendment was routinely ignored by Southern states using the legal mechanism of Jim Crow.
Poll taxes, literacy tests and language restrictions were the most visible tools of voter suppression. However, Black voters who successfully navigated those hurdles still faced the ignominy of not having a real choice. Hostile political regimes drew the boundaries of voting lines and districts to make it impossible for Black and brown voters to elect anyone who represented their interests. Enter the Voting Rights Act.
Section 2 of that act made it illegal to design districts to dilute or block racial communities from finding common cause. It also required a corrective action: When populations routinely boxed out of meaningful participation hit a certain threshold, political districts should reflect their growing power. Thus, political leaders couldn’t use maps as weapons to permanently silence the voices of people of color.
The John Roberts Court has now declared that racism in American politics is no more. Despite the recent behavior in Texas and North CarolinaWednesday’s cruel Callais decision pretends that Jim Crow is a bygone era and not this week’s news. Section 2 represented the core protection against racially discriminatory redistricting, but now the court has dramatically narrowed one of the last meaningful tools marginalized communities had to challenge maps designed to erase their political existence. For decades, Section 2 gave Black voters in the South and brown voters in the Southwest access to the courts to remedy harm. There was something those voters could do when, for example, state legislatures split Black neighborhoods across districts or packed Latinos into as few seats as possible to minimize their broader influence. Section 2 was not a perfect safeguard but it worked, and it instituted accountability.
Now, thanks to Roberts, who has made a career of dismantling the Voting Rights Actand the rest of the Supreme Court’s conservative members, that accountability is gone.
We are rushing headlong into midterm elections, and that timing matters. The Supreme Court and those celebrating this decision know what they’ve done. Lines drawn on state maps determine who has a realistic chance to win seats in Congress and in state legislatures. Lines drawn on county and municipal maps determine who wins seats on school boards. Such lines can be drawn to guarantee voters of color are silenced before a single vote is cast. The consequences of this disastrous ruling are already reverberating across our country. Majority-Black districts could be dismantled or diluted. Latino districts in fast-growing areas could lose political muscle. Representatives championing the minority communities they represent will likely lose their seats. Congressional maps in closely divided states could be tilted further away from competitiveness.
Almost immediately, Florida redrew its federal legislative districts as lawmakers meet in special session. In Mississippi, the state where I grew up, the governor has called for a special session to make the state Supreme Court less racially representative. In Georgia, where I live, conservative candidates are calling for the Georgia Legislature to follow suit. Today’s decision will open a floodgate of redrawn political districts and retaliatory actions, a mere four years before the next U.S. Census will remind us of what we know to be true: The demographics of America are evolving. This ruling is an attempt to slow the pace of change, if not halt it altogether.
Once such horrible maps are in place, reversing them is extraordinarily difficult.
While Black voters are disproportionately at risk after Thursday’s ruling — they could lose up to 30% of the Congressional Black CaucusFair Fight Action and Black Voters Matter say — it’s important to emphasize that every American who doesn’t share the ideology driving the erasure of Black voting strength is at risk.
When courts curtail the ability to challenge unfair maps, the ripple effects extend to Latino communities, Asian American neighborhoods, Native American enclaves, young voters, working-class districts and rural regions alike. The restoration of racial discrimination in voting makes it easier to take power from all of us. As devastating as Thursday’s ruling is, we saw it coming. Over 15 years, the VRA has been weakened several times. Shelby County v. Holder hollowed out Section 5. Rucho v. Common Cause allowed for partisan gerrymandering and Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee limited lawsuits against racially discriminatory voting laws.
The Voting Rights Act stood as a guard against abuse of power by a racial majority that had — and has — repeatedly failed to act fairly.
Today’s ruling on Louisiana v. Callais strikes even closer to the bone by narrowing the very mechanism communities use to fight discriminatory maps in court. These decisions have steadily built upon one another, eviscerating the protections mandated by the 15th Amendment and perhaps altering the country’s memory of what the VRA attempted to fix. More than just a law protecting voting rights, the VRA stood as a guard against abuse of power by a racial majority that had — and has — repeatedly failed to act fairly.
This is how authoritarianism is imposed: through incremental decisions that remove democracy’s guardrails. We now find ourselves returning to the before-times. But instead of Alabama state police on the Edmund Pettus Bridge, we have state legislators with poison pens, drafting themselves into permanent power. In a democracy, the faith of the people is born of a belief that they can participate in its processes and benefit from its success. Authoritarians need only break that faith in order to hold on to power or expand it. And the Supreme Court has been hard at work to make it so.
But the Supreme Court is not the only actor in this story. Congress retains the authority to strengthen voting rights protections. State legislatures can adopt independent redistricting commissions or refuse to vote for racially discriminatory maps. Voters can reach out to elected officials at every level of government and demand that they publicly take a stand for voting rights. Civic organizations can mobilize communities to solve for voter suppression tactics even when the rules shift.
In Louisiana v. Callais, the Supreme Court lies to America by claiming a racial neutrality in our laws that every day under this regime proves false. Politicians opposed to full participation in democracy will rush to take advantage of this hat-tip to hatred, and the resulting political fights will destabilize our country months ahead of November’s midterm elections.
But the midterms are a way station on the road to saving America’s soul, and we must understand them — and this decision — as a call to action. We who believe in democracy must act with urgency and elect leaders of moral integrity.
The fight for a multiracial democracy is the central pillar of our national story. For 250 years, we have grappled with our choices and sometimes suffered the consequences. But we have always moved forward when people organized, persisted and refused to back down. That work must — and will — continue.
Stacey Abrams
Stacey Abrams, a New York Times bestselling author, is a former member of the Georgia House of Representatives, where she served as minority leader for seven years. She was the first Black woman to become the gubernatorial nominee for a major party in United States history.
The Senate Judiciary Committee postponed a vote on acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s nomination, a spokesperson said late Wednesday, as two retiring Republicans on the panel dug in over President Donald Trump’s personal “anti-weaponization” deal with the government he runs.
Sen. Chuck Grassley’s decision to delay the committee vote that had been set for Thursday marks a setback for one of Trump’s highest-profile Cabinet nominees, at the hands of Texas Sen. John Cornyn and Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, a pair of Republicans set to leave the chamber next year.
“Chairman Grassley works to set President Trump’s nominees up for success in committee, not failure. Senators Cornyn and Tillis want written assurances from the Department of Justice regarding the Trump-IRS settlement,” the committee spokesperson said.
Blanche’s nomination to permanently head the Department of Justice needs the support of either Cornyn or Tillis to make it out of the committee to a vote by the full Senate, assuming all Democrats remain opposed.
“Why don’t you call over the Department of Justice and tell them they have one hour and 50 minutes to get me what I asked for,” Cornyn told reporters Wednesday afternoon amid the hardening standoff over his demand that Blanche and the DOJ put in writing a commitment never to pursue the president’s prized “anti-weaponization” fund, and to clarify the terms of Trump’s personal deal with the Internal Revenue Service.
Tillis told MS NOW that the conversations were complicated by the need for the Justice Department to get “several parties” to agree on the language of the statement Cornyn and Tillis are seeking.
“What I’ve advised the chair, and I would assume Senator Cornyn said something similar, is that we’re not prepared to vote yes yet,” he added.
“The Department has been in regular communication with Committee members for weeks, and we look forward to continuing to work productively with Senators to address any concerns,” a Justice Department spokesperson said in response to the decision to postpone the committee vote.
Cornyn was set to meet with Blanche on Wednesday morning, but the meeting was called off after Blanche failed to meet the senator’s demand for written proposals to modify the controversial settlement agreement he brokered between Trump and the IRS. The Republican senator is set to leave Congress when his term ends in January after a bruising May primary loss to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, Trump’s chosen candidate.
“Maybe John Cornyn’s upset with me because I didn’t endorse him,” Trump told reporters Wednesday afternoon in the Oval Office. “I don’t know what it is, but I haven’t heard that there’s a problem. I heard (Blanche) is going through quite nicely.”
Cornyn made clear to Blanche during his confirmation hearing that he will not get his support until he agrees to reopen and modify the settlement. Due to the committee’s narrow Republican majority, one GOP “no” vote is enough to sink Blanche’s nomination.
The senator has asked Blanche to provide proof that the proposed nearly $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund established as part of the deal between Trump and the IRS is formally dead, and he has also demanded Blanche narrow the tax audit immunity provisions the settlement afforded to Trump and his family.
Blanche has publicly stated that his department has dropped the fund, but he and the DOJ have dodged requests from Cornyn and a federal judge to put that in writing.
After announcing his meeting with Blanche would not take place Wednesday morning, Cornyn told reporters that changes from Blanche “in a modified release form” would be acceptable, but that “for some reason … they simply refuse to do it,” referring to the DOJ.
Shortly after the meeting was called off, a Justice Department official told MS NOW that the department “provided a written proposal to Senator Cornyn’s staff yesterday following ongoing discussion with both the Committee and the Senator’s office.”
Cornyn said that proposal was “not responsive” to his demands because it did not address the tax audit immunity provisions in the settlement, one of his key demands.
In May, Blanche signed an addendum as part of the deal that granted Trump, his family and his businesses immunity from pending IRS tax audits. That agreement, which has been decried by former IRS officials and legal experts as unlawful self-dealing, is being contested in federal court.
Cornyn noted that Blanche testified under oath that he could meet the request during his confirmation hearing.
“Maybe they think I’m just going to give up or you know, go along, but they’re mistaken,” Cornyn said when asked why he thinks the DOJ could be slow-walking his request.
Kevin Frey contributed to this report.
Sydney Carruth is a breaking news reporter covering national politics and policy for MS NOW. You can send her tips from a non-work device on Signal at SydneyCarruth.46 or follow her work on X and Bluesky.
Mychael Schnell is a reporter for MS NOW.
Ebony Davis is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked at BLN as a campaign reporter covering elections and politics.
When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrived this week for his tour of Washington, he may have had a mission in mind.
Netanyahu needed to overcome his newly diminished stature and waning influence over his once close friend President Donald Trump as both leaders grapple with the unpopularity of a war they started together and is escaping their control.
His meeting at the White House with Trump on Tuesday, which was closed to the press, was the first face-to-face encounter between the two allies since the U.S. and Israel launched a joint attack against Iran on Feb. 28.
Trump gave him a muted welcome and afterwards simply described the meeting as “very good.” “Obviously, many important subjects were discussed,” the president wrote on Truth Social.
Rather than an intimate one-on-one setting, the Oval Office was full of top U.S. officials — Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine, and special envoy Steve Witkoff.
But Netanyahu continued the full court press on the Trump administration.
Over the course of two days, in addition to seeing Trump and attending Sen. Lindsey Graham’s funeral at the Capitol, Netanyahu also met separately with Vance, Hegseth, and Rubio, White House and Israeli officials confirmed to MS NOW.
The Israeli prime minister’s slate of meetings with key U.S. national security officials comes at a pivotal moment in the Iran conflict as tensions escalate in the region and Americans increasingly sour on the war. A recent Quinnipiac poll shows 60% of American voters opposing U.S. military action against Iran and 74% against sending U.S. ground troops into Iran.
Not only does Trump face pressure as Republicans face an uphill battle to retain congressional control in this fall’s midterms, Netanyahu’s fate as prime minister is at stake in Israel’s upcoming September elections – and he can’t afford to lose Trump’s favor.
The talks largely focused on what to do next as Iran continues to menace shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and retaliate against American bases in the region and launch attacks on Gulf allies.
According to a senior Israeli official who was granted anonymity to describe the closed-door meeting, President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu did not come to a final decision after discussing three paths forward: get a “good deal” focused on Iran’s nuclear program and enriched material, have no deal and instead continue the blockade and economic pressure, or take escalated military action.
But Netanyahu did not tell Trump what he should do – nor did he express a preference.
The senior Israeli official noted Netanyahu has not ruled out diplomacy – as long as it is coupled with “very strong pressures,” calling the push to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program “a contest of will and a contest of force.”
“There are ways of squeezing them and squeezing them and squeezing them and negotiating at the same time,” the official said.
Netanyahu did not present President Trump with new intelligence regarding the underground Iranian nuclear facility Pickaxe Mountain, per the senior Israeli official, noting the U.S. and Israel already are constantly sharing intelligence – and know where Iran’s highly enriched material is. “We don’t think it’s moved, and I think we have a pretty good grasp on that,” the official said.
During their meeting on Tuesday, Trump and Netanyahu discussed ways Israel and the U.S. can work together to stop Iran’s nuclear program and get the Strait of Hormuz open to maritime trade, the senior Israeli official said.
The two leaders also discussed a third goal: to continue to undermine the Iranian regime and “possibly create future conditions for a change in that area.” U.S. officials have backed away from pursuing paths that would overthrow the current leadership, but Netanyahu still believes that could happen.
“The chasm that has been created between the people and the regime is not about to be closed,” the senior Israeli official said of Netanyahu’s thinking.
Netanyahu advised Trump in February that Israeli intelligence indicated launching strikes against Iran would lead to the toppling of the Islamic Republic’s regime – and five months later, the slain ayatollah’s son retains power with a close circle of hardliners, calling into question the accuracy of Israel’s intelligence apparatus.
But the senior Israeli official said at the time, Netanyahu did not promise the Iranian people would take fate into their own hands following a coordinated attack. Rather, he chose his words carefully and said that an attack could create conditions to “advance the probability or the possibility that that would happen.”
The conditions needed for the Iranian regime to fall, “did not materialize,” the official told MS NOW, adding, “not for lack of insight, but for either operational failure or decisions that were made.”
Despite Netanyahu insisting Israel and the U.S. are on the same page, differences still remain: the sale of F-35 fighter jets to Turkey and the Saudi nuclear arrangement did not come up during Wednesday’s White House meeting, according to a second Israeli official granted anonymity to describe sensitive discussions.
Meanwhile, the conflict continues to spread, with an Iranian drone attacking a U.S. gas storage tanker off the coast of Egypt on Wednesday.
Trump indicated he would not let Iran’s latest action slide, telling reporters on Wednesday that the U.S. would retaliate against Iran even as he leaves room for diplomatic talks to resume.
“It’s our turn, and we’ll see if we get there with an agreement at some point,” Trump said. “But we’re going to hit them very hard.”
As for what it would take for Israel to join the U.S. strikes, the senior Israeli official said that if Israel is attacked by Iran, “We will respond very, very forcefully and very quickly. And I think Iran would make a great mistake.”
Julia Jester covers politics for MS NOW and is based in Washington, D.C.
International rage over FIFA’s close ties to President Donald Trump has reached a fever pitch after soccer’s governing body announced a plan to sell a significant stake to an investor group led by Joshua Kushner, the brother of Trump’s son-in-law.
The president and his family have all but turned the White House into their personal piggy bank. And FIFA — which has its own sordid history of corruption — seems to have made itself a party to Trump’s self-enrichment under Gianni Infantino’s leadership, such as by paying for space inside Trump Tower in New York. (The organization has defended the office rental as a World Cup outpost.)
Soccer is seen by many as a unifying game. But Trump’s incorporation of FIFA into his political dynasty is threatening that idea.
FIFA has announced plans to sell a large minority stake in a new company that will run its main events, including the World Cup and Club World Cup, as part of a plan to triple the amount of development money it dishes out to its 211 member associations.
Under the proposals — which are subject to approval by a majority of those national associations and FIFA’s 37-member council — a new entity called FIFA Forward Enterprises (FFE) will take over all commercial operations, while FIFA remains the game’s global governing body and retains a majority stake in FFE.
A press release from FIFA confirmed the plans and said Thrive Eternal, which was launched by Joshua Kushner, is expected to lead the investment group that would control FIFA Forward Enterprise. FIFA did not clarify why Thrive Eternal was selected, and Kushner was already dabbling in sports.
But Trump basically has already given son-in-law Jared Kushner carte blanche to dictate U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East while simultaneously hatching business plans in the region. (Jared Kushner has denied any conflicts of interest.)
Joshua Kushner reportedly has been a major donor to Democrats. But, predictably, the idea of another Kushner becoming financially entwined with the World Cup — the world’s most popular sporting event — and basically being dropped into a position of global significance isn’t going over well. Several other soccer governing bodies have expressed concerns, including Europe’s UEFA.
“This crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross,” UEFA said in a statement about The Athletic’s report, adding: “The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade — especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially. None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA’s to sell.”
Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee also rebuked the plan, writing on X: “Apparently the fake Peace Prize and giant lease with Trump Tower weren’t enough — now Infantino performs a kickback hat trick by pursuing a multibillion-dollar deal with Jared Kushner’s brother to sell ownership stakes in the World Cup to private investors.”
FIFA, Donald Trump’s favorite corrupt racketeering enterprise in world sports, is now going directly into business with the Trump family!
Apparently the fake Peace Prize and giant lease with Trump Tower weren’t enough—now Infantino performs a kickback hat trick by pursuing a… https://t.co/knSZibuMea
— House Judiciary Dems (@HouseJudiciary) July 28, 2026
Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., has already launched an investigation into the FIFA leader’s relationship with the Trump administration, while dozens of European lawmakers — citing concerns about “potential breaches of political neutrality” — have called for the FIFA Ethics Committee to investigate Infantino. This new proposal seems unlikely to assuage those concerns.
But what it does seem likely to do is fuel global anger toward the U.S. — the kind that has been growing since Trump retook office.
And when you consider that, it’s truly remarkable how the same MAGA movement whose members whined for years about politics mixing with sports is now in lockstep with a president who seems dead-set on casting his shadow over every sports event he can.
This post on X basically sums up the foul stench around FIFA’s latest proposal.
Sepp Blatter was Infantino’s predecessor as FIFA president and oversaw the organization amid some of its many scandals. When heof all people, is warning about how Trump and Infantino’s relationship is “deeply damaging” soccer, it’s a sign of how far FIFA has descended into the gutter.
Ja’han Jones is an MS NOW opinion blogger. He previously wrote The ReidOut Blog.
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship11 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words