Is The U.S. Supreme Court In Contempt Of Black America?

Chief Justice John Roberts

            The U.S. Supreme court ruled on June 25, 2013 by a Writ of Certiorari to “invalidate” section 4 of the Voter Rights Act (VRA) of 1965. This section provides crucial protections for Black Americans against states that have a long history of promulgating racist obstructions to voting or running for office. Chief Justice John Roberts, delivered the Supreme Court’s opinion in the  SHELBY COUNTY, ALABAMA v. HOLDER, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ET AL, case. As stated in the Supreme Court Syllabus for this case:

 The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was enacted to address entrenched racial discrimination in voting, “an insidious and pervasive evil which had been perpetuated in certain parts of our country through unremitting and ingenious defiance of the Constitution.” South Carolina v. Kat­zenbach, 383 U. S. 301, 309. Section 2 of the Act, which bans any “standard, practice, or procedure” that “results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen . . . to vote on account of race or color,” 42 U. S. C. §1973(a), applies nationwide, is permanent, and is not at issue in this case.

 Click here to see the full Supreme court syllabus

Article II Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, provides that the judicial Power of the united States , shall be vested in one supreme court. The supreme court has jurisdiction to interpret issues of the U.S. Constitution and statutes that Congress has enacted pursuant to its limited powers under the U.S. Constitution.

One can interpret the current actions of the U.S. Supreme Court by some of the current theories of Jurisprudence. I believe that our present U.S. Supreme court justices are operating under Legal Realism. “The proponents of Legal Realism assert that judges decide cases based on factors other than logic and preexisting rules, such as economic and sociological factors.” 

It is my opinion that their ruling is an example of an Evolutionary Approach to constitutional interpretation in which judges seek to determine the underlying, purpose that the drafters had in mind at the time they wrote the law and the modern-day option that best advances that purpose.

Voting fraud is rampant throughout this country. Even the presidential elections are nothing but a staged TV media show to make it look like we are living in a “free” country. Our leaders are not elected by the U.S. Citizenry but are selected by the 1%. These elections are just staged TV shows to make it look like American citizens are electing these unscrupulous politicians into office. It was very obvious that our last President George Walker Bush, was not duly elected as president in his first term or especially the second term. His “selection” into office was just another hostile take over by the Bush Family Regime and “Right Wing” Republicans. He even got the lone African American Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice, of the U.S. Supreme Court to authorize his election “selection” results that put Bush into office. His election was highly criticized for corruption and for obvious attempts to suppress Black American voter turnout.

The U.S. Supreme court does not have jurisdiction to decide the outcome of elections from the states for the American people. Associate Justice Clarence Thomas did not mention this fact and still has not even tried to do anything about it! This was obvious bias on partisan lines for Republicans by Clarence Thomas. Subsequently, the Supreme Court did nothing to oppose any of the criminal acts by the Bush Administration and has done nothing to end the voter fraud and voter manipulations that dominate our electoral process in this country.

As reported by the article published on the RT Website, “The regions covered by the part of the Act that was struck down, Section 4, have, in recent years, been twice as likely as those not covered to have proven violations under other sections of the Act,” wrote The New Yorker’s Amy Davidson.

George Walker Bush, just like his father George H. W. Bush, has conducted a campaign to “dismantle” the Civil Rights advancements that were gained for Black Americans by 1965. I feel that the executive branch of our government is using the Supreme Court in the Judicial Branch of our government to continue their degradation of Civil Rights for Black Americans that is guaranteed by our constitution.

The Supreme Court’s justification of their ruling states in essence, there is no problem because more blacks are voting than back in 1965 and there are more blacks in political office now than back in 1965.This seems to be some kind of “Judicial Propaganda” to me and does not reflect true statistics or reality. I do know that voter turn out in California for Black Americans is at an all time low because there are no viable candidates for Blacks to vote for. They say that there are more Blacks in office now than back in 1964. This is true, but these so-called African Americans in political office have no real substance and will not stand up for Black Americans at all! This can be seen by our current President Barack Obama, who will not even say “Black Americans” when he is running for office, has not mentioned any of the atrocities that have been committed against Black Americans by our judicial system and law enforcement agencies. Obama demonstrated during his campaign that he is committed to do more for Mexico and Mexicans than American citizens. That is why African Americans are worse off now than back in 1913!

The Supreme Court’s opinion also states that voter protections for Black Americans should be based on current conditions than what was prevalent back in 1965. It seems to me that this opinion of the constitution is keeping in the Evolutionary Approach of constitutional interpretational jurisprudence, in that they are trying to take current social issues into consideration as a basis for the  requirement that the federal government “preclear” states or local changes in election rules that could potentially prevent minorities from voting. If this were true, then they should be trying to add more protections for Black Americans for voter rights and to assure that viable Black American candidates run for office that will stand up of the rights of Black African Americans than to just take away all protections.