Justice Ginsburg Slams Supreme Court’s ‘Hubris’ In Fiery Dissent On Voting Rights Act Tell it, Sister Ruth.

This may be the most destructive SCOTUS since Justice Taney et al. decided Dred Scott. First Citizens United; now this.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday effectively struck down the heart of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by a 5-to-4 vote, ruling that Congress had not provided adequate justification for subjecting nine states, mostly in the South, to federal oversight.

“In 1965, the states could be divided into two groups: those with a recent history of voting tests and low voter registration and turnout, and those without those characteristics,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. “Congress based its coverage formula on that distinction. Today the nation is no longer divided along those lines, yet the Voting Rights Act continues to treat it as if it were.”

Does Justice Roberts live on the moon? Has Justice Roberts even visited this country?

I linked it in the last post, but a lot of what Chris Hayes says here applies to the SCOTUS and this decision — the nature of the South; the sort of people who rise to prominent positions.

Stuff worth reading —

Chris Hayes: Bring on the upper-middle-class revolution!

Morality study finds conservatives show a ‘general insensitivity to consequences’

6 Mind-Blowing Stats on How 1 Percent of the 1 Percent Now Dominate Our Elections