Jackson’s Analogy Sparks Discussion
During oral arguments this week in Louisiana v. Callais, Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson drew attention for comparing racial voting barriers to the accessibility issues addressed under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The case examines whether states must consider race when drawing congressional maps under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Jackson’s remarks came as she expanded on questions from Justice Elena Kagan about how the government should address discrimination even when intent is not explicit.
Jackson noted that the ADA was enacted “against the backdrop of a world that was generally not accessible to people with disabilities,” explaining that equal access requirements apply regardless of intent. She questioned why the same principle would not apply to ensuring equal access to the voting process for minority voters.
Exchange Over Race and Remedies
When the attorney representing Louisiana responded that ADA remedies are “not race-based,” Jackson acknowledged the point but pressed further, asking whether states could ignore racial inequities simply because the remedy itself might consider race.
Her questions underscored the broader legal issue: whether governments can act to correct the present-day effects of past discrimination without proving intent. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act requires equal opportunity in elections, but the Court’s conservative majority appeared open to narrowing its application.
Reference to Prior Court Language
Jackson’s remarks referenced earlier Supreme Court language from Allen v. Milligan (2021), in which the Court used the term “disabled” to describe unequal access in redistricting cases. She noted that her phrasing reflected that precedent rather than a direct comparison between racial identity and disability.
Despite this, the exchange drew attention online, with some critics suggesting Jackson’s analogy was inappropriate. Others viewed it as a legal illustration of how structural barriers can persist even without intentional exclusion.
Broader Implications for Voting Rights
The Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais could reshape how Section 2 is applied nationwide. Depending on the outcome, the ruling may alter how states use racial data when determining district boundaries, potentially affecting minority voter representation for years to come.
Related Coverage
- Idaho News – https://idahonews.co/idaho-news-3/
- National News – https://idahonews.co/national-news/
About the Author
