＜p＞Both the U.S. Supreme Court and the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) claim to advocate minority political interests, yet they disagree over the intent and scope of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), as well as the interpretation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Whereas the Court promotes color-blind policies, the CBC advocates race-based remedies. Setting this debate in the context of the history of black political thought, Rivers examines a series of high-profile districting cases, from ＜em＞Rodgers v. Lodge＜/em＞ (1982) through ＜em＞NAMUDNO v. Holder＜/em＞ (2009). She evaluates the competing approaches to racial equality and concludes, surprisingly, that an originalist, race-conscious interpretation of the 14th Amendment, along with a revised states' rights position regarding electoral districting, may better serve minority political interests.＜/p＞画面が切り替わりますので、しばらくお待ち下さい。
※ご購入は、楽天kobo商品ページからお願いします。
※切り替わらない場合は、こちら をクリックして下さい。
※このページからは注文できません。
楽天で購入3,073円（税込み）