1
00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:02,320
Speaker 1: And now it's time for our daily Bloomberg Law Brief,

2
00:00:02,360 --> 00:00:05,240
Speaker 1: exploring legal issues in the news. And today Bloomberg lahst

3
00:00:05,280 --> 00:00:08,959
Speaker 1: Greg's store discusses a Supreme Court ruling and North Carolina

4
00:00:09,000 --> 00:00:12,520
Speaker 1: Republicans relied to heavily on race when they drew two

5
00:00:12,640 --> 00:00:16,000
Speaker 1: oddly shaped congressional voting districts in the state. He speaks

6
00:00:16,000 --> 00:00:19,239
Speaker 1: in Napor silly Or, professor at Stanford University Law School,

7
00:00:20,000 --> 00:00:22,320
Speaker 1: want you just start by giving us a brief explanation

8
00:00:22,400 --> 00:00:24,840
Speaker 1: of what the court held. There were two different two

9
00:00:24,840 --> 00:00:27,760
Speaker 1: districts and in two different rationales for for what the

10
00:00:27,760 --> 00:00:30,960
Speaker 1: court did well. The Court once again is reviewing the

11
00:00:30,960 --> 00:00:33,720
Speaker 1: North Carolina every districting plan. And I said once again

12
00:00:33,800 --> 00:00:36,440
Speaker 1: because over the last twenty years it has looked at

13
00:00:36,479 --> 00:00:39,400
Speaker 1: these districts five or six times. And what they said

14
00:00:39,560 --> 00:00:42,320
Speaker 1: was that the first district, but the but the first

15
00:00:42,360 --> 00:00:46,479
Speaker 1: district and the twelfth district were unconstitutional because they excessively

16
00:00:46,640 --> 00:00:51,960
Speaker 1: used race. And the first district was unconstitutional because you

17
00:00:52,120 --> 00:00:55,560
Speaker 1: could not blame the district on the Voting Rights Act,

18
00:00:55,600 --> 00:00:57,560
Speaker 1: which is what the state attempted to do. They said,

19
00:00:57,920 --> 00:01:01,160
Speaker 1: you had to draw an over fifty percent African American

20
00:01:01,200 --> 00:01:03,240
Speaker 1: district to comply with the Voting Rights Act. The Supreme

21
00:01:03,240 --> 00:01:06,440
Speaker 1: Court said, no, you did not, uh, and so because

22
00:01:06,440 --> 00:01:10,600
Speaker 1: you've used race so extensively, that district unconstitutional. With respect

23
00:01:10,600 --> 00:01:13,160
Speaker 1: of the twelve district, North Carolina defended it as part

24
00:01:13,160 --> 00:01:15,479
Speaker 1: of its partisan jerrymander, saying it was drawing a very

25
00:01:15,520 --> 00:01:18,720
Speaker 1: safe democratic district. The Court here, in a five to

26
00:01:18,840 --> 00:01:22,759
Speaker 1: three vote, said that the district was an unconstitutional racial

27
00:01:22,800 --> 00:01:26,800
Speaker 1: jerrymander because you're essentially using race as a proxy for partisanship.

28
00:01:27,319 --> 00:01:31,759
Speaker 1: And so, just because you are drawing districts that might

29
00:01:31,840 --> 00:01:35,000
Speaker 1: harm Democrats by packing them together doesn't get you out

30
00:01:35,000 --> 00:01:37,279
Speaker 1: of the fact that race and party are so highly

31
00:01:37,319 --> 00:01:40,600
Speaker 1: correlated in North Carolina in that district that it still

32
00:01:40,680 --> 00:01:43,440
Speaker 1: runs a file of the constance. And what in all that, Nate,

33
00:01:43,520 --> 00:01:47,160
Speaker 1: would you pick out as the most important or most

34
00:01:47,240 --> 00:01:51,360
Speaker 1: surprising part of this ruling? As you suggested, one of

35
00:01:51,400 --> 00:01:53,960
Speaker 1: the more interesting UH facts of this case is the

36
00:01:54,080 --> 00:01:57,480
Speaker 1: final vote on District twelve. That just Justice Laurence Thomas,

37
00:01:57,680 --> 00:02:01,880
Speaker 1: is generally pretty conservative on constitutional questions, joined with the

38
00:02:02,000 --> 00:02:05,480
Speaker 1: four more liberal justices to strike down District twelve. And

39
00:02:05,520 --> 00:02:08,720
Speaker 1: it shows you a kind of strange bedfellows in cases

40
00:02:08,760 --> 00:02:12,399
Speaker 1: like this, we're Justice Thomas, who advocates a color blindness

41
00:02:12,440 --> 00:02:15,600
Speaker 1: approach to redistricting and other kinds of government action, whereas

42
00:02:15,639 --> 00:02:19,160
Speaker 1: the Democrats are the more liberal justices on the on

43
00:02:19,240 --> 00:02:24,840
Speaker 1: the Court were um offended by the district because it's

44
00:02:24,880 --> 00:02:28,600
Speaker 1: sort of discriminated against African Americans by packing them uh

45
00:02:28,919 --> 00:02:32,480
Speaker 1: in too high concentrations. And so that was I think

46
00:02:32,480 --> 00:02:35,400
Speaker 1: the most significant sort of fact about this case was

47
00:02:35,440 --> 00:02:39,040
Speaker 1: that you had the strange confluence of liberals and conservatives.

48
00:02:39,600 --> 00:02:42,400
Speaker 1: That name for Silly a professor at Stanford University Law

49
00:02:42,440 --> 00:02:45,040
Speaker 1: School speaking with Bloomberg Law host Greg Store and you

50
00:02:45,040 --> 00:02:47,320
Speaker 1: can listen to Bloomberg Law weekdays at one pm Wall

51
00:02:47,360 --> 00:02:50,239
Speaker 1: Street time here on Bloomberg Radio. And you can find

52
00:02:50,280 --> 00:02:53,000
Speaker 1: more legal news at Bloomberg Law dot com and Bloomberg

53
00:02:53,040 --> 00:02:56,120
Speaker 1: BNA dot com. Attorneys will find exceptional legal research and

54
00:02:56,200 --> 00:02:59,400
Speaker 1: business development tools there as well. Visit Bloomberg Law dot

55
00:02:59,480 --> 00:03:03,040
Speaker 1: com and Lemberg b NA dot com for more information