Guy Ciarrocchi: Democrats’ predictable overreactions to redistricting rulings

The U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision regarding the Voting Rights Act. Some might be surprised to read that the majority actually upheld the decades-old act. Yet the majority also held that purposefully designing congressional districts to have a majority of a racial minority in a district is itself actually a violation — it’s discrimination. Some might not know both of these facts given the vitriol from the Left — the whining, threats and KKK analogies coming from Democrat politicians and the usual commentators.

A commentator on CNN reacted to the recent court decisions and actually said: “If someone fell asleep in 1896 and woke up today, they would say that the only difference is now black Americans have TV shows and nice suits. They’ve swapped-out Klan hoods for Brooks Brothers Suits.” 

The First Amendment allows speech that is misguided, way over-the-top, purposefully ignorant of reality, and intentionally inflammatory and divisive. But it’s time we recognize it for what it is — ignorant and purposefully misleading, with the true intention of delegitimizing the Supreme Court and tearing down American society.

It should be rejected both on its merits — and as a form of political dialogue. Moreover, those perpetuating this poison should not be elected to lead our government. 

This is the vitriol that fuels the permanent grievance-class that’s not always merely upset; they’re furious — at America and Americans. They’d just as soon tear society down. It comes through in the rhetoric and their policies.

The Court’s majority respected Congress’s right to ensure that our laws must never be used to impede anyone casting a ballot based on one’s race. At the same time, the Court ruled that in 2026 — as opposed to 1965 when the Voting Rights Act was enacted — it is no longer necessary to purposefully design black or Hispanic or Asian congressional districts. Moreover, it is a violation of the Constitution to do so. 

At its core, their anger is about partisan power, not racial justice. They’re furious that a new Tennessee district might be won by a black Republican woman over a white Democrat man!

Those purposefully misrepresenting what the ruling does and doesn’t do have as their goal not only tearing down American society, but delegitimizing the “racist” Republican Party. They either choose to ignore or are ignorant of some historical realities. Tragically, racism and bigotry have existed for centuries. And, are a sad part of our history. 

“Systemic racism” actually has its roots in the Democrat Party — the party of slavery, secession and Jim Crow laws. And, yes, the KKK. Do they expect us to forget late Senate majority leader, Robert Byrd?

Anyone studying Court rulings knows that the majority’s ruling — essentially rejecting quotas and affirmative action as discriminatory — is consistent with decades of Court decisions regarding workplace hiring and promotions and college admissions. Racial preferences are illegal — no matter the intentions of the advocates.

One may disagree with the decision — even do so strenuously. But to fake surprise and manufacture outrage — in the face of decades of consistent legal rulings — is to purposely mislead and selfishly incite the permanent “victims” in society.

The theatrics only got worse with the Virginia Supreme Court ruling. 

The newly elected governor repeatedly pledge not to re-district their congressional districts, but she wasn’t even sworn in before she violated that pledge. Moreover, in the most blatant power grab in the nation, their Democrats attempted to redistrict the state’s congressional delegation from 6-5 Democratic to 10-1 Democratic.

The Governor would’ve been allowed to lie to voters, Virginia Democrats would’ve been allowed to be power-mongers, and they would’ve rammed through a statewide referendum with blatantly misleading language to achieve a partisan power-grab.

But the Virginia Supreme Court — composed of a clear majority of Democrats — ruled that Democratic politicians violated their state constitution. Immediately, the over-the-top reactions started again.

Their court “rejected democracy,” they say. Well, yes, in a sense, they did. But we don’t live in a “democracy.” We don’t allow mob rule by the majority. We live in a constitutional democratic republic. Citizens elect representatives to govern, within the boundaries of constitutions — with the protections of our inalienable rights and liberties.

Raising the stakes, they threatened to term-limit or age-out every sitting judge. This scheme would allow the new governor to pack the court with brand-new, hand-selected judges. Blessedly, enough Democrats have come forward to reject this blatant scheme.

AOC even bloviated — alleging the court held back its ruling making it impossible to try an alternative. Never letting facts get in the way of her rantings, she “overlooked” that the governor’s attorneys petitioned the court to delay the ruling until after the rushed-through “referendum.”

The theatrics are sadly orchestrated and come from the same playbook with the same themes.

If the Democrats are blocked from violating the Constitution by the Supreme Court, Justices are bigots, corrupt or Trump-sycophants. Those Justices ought to be removed, term-limited, or the Court ought to be packed with progressive activists to “fix” it.

If any Democrat goes against any left-wing scheme to take or grow power — or impose a socialist nirvana on society, they ought to be impeached, shamed out of office or primaried.

Their policies and thirst for power all too often involves tearing-down the pillars of our society.

Maybe — just maybe! — that’s their real goal.

Guy Ciarrocchi writes for Broad + Liberty and RealClear Pennsylvania.A Senior Fellow with the Commonwealth Foundation, follow Guy at @PhilaFreedomGuy.