成人小说亚洲一区二区三区,亚洲国产精品一区二区三区,国产精品成人精品久久久,久久综合一区二区三区,精品无码av一区二区,国产一级a毛一级a看免费视频,欧洲uv免费在线区一二区,亚洲国产欧美中日韩成人综合视频,国产熟女一区二区三区五月婷小说,亚洲一区波多野结衣在线

6月17日，美國最高法院在一起種族歧視性杰利蠑螈案中做出了反對(duì)弗吉尼亞州參議院的判決。最高法院駁回了上訴，案件判決結(jié)果讓弗吉尼亞州的民主黨人取得了渴望已久的勝利。

杰利蠑螈指的是通過重新劃分選區(qū)，讓某一黨派在選舉中更具優(yōu)勢(shì)，迫使另一方“浪費(fèi)”選票。例如，有些人劃定選區(qū)界線時(shí)，可能會(huì)把反對(duì)黨的支持者集中在同一個(gè)選區(qū)，集中選票，這樣他們就只能影響少數(shù)幾個(gè)席位。

最高法院在長(zhǎng)達(dá)22頁的意見書中表示，按照之前地方法院的判定，由共和黨人控制的弗吉尼亞州參議院劃定的幾份選區(qū)地圖違憲，屬于種族歧視性的杰利蠑螈行為，該州參議院在法律上無權(quán)就此提出異議。按照最高法院的裁定結(jié)果，地方法院判定的更有利于民主黨的選區(qū)地圖將繼續(xù)使用。

或者，這樣做也可能意味著把反對(duì)派選民集中到了由另外一方政黨把持的選區(qū)，導(dǎo)致反對(duì)黨很難贏得選舉。

此前，弗吉尼亞州的首席檢察官（民主黨人）決定不就地方法院推翻選區(qū)地圖的裁決提出上訴，后來弗吉尼亞州參議院提出上訴，最高法院受理了此案。

弗吉尼亞州參議院訴貝蘇尼-希爾一案最終的裁決結(jié)果得到了5票贊成、4票反對(duì)，大法官魯思·巴德爾·金斯伯格撰寫了支持派的意見。該判決還得到了法官克拉倫斯·托馬斯、索尼婭·索托馬約爾、埃琳娜·卡根和尼爾·戈薩奇的支持，他們有人屬于自由派，也有人是保守派。

雖然最高法院按照基本原則駁回了上訴請(qǐng)求，但法官們并未裁定這些地圖是否構(gòu)成違憲的種族歧視性杰利蠑螈行為。

“法庭注意到，弗吉尼亞州將重劃選區(qū)的權(quán)力授予了‘全體大會(huì)’。的確如此?！苯鹚共駥懙?，“（但是），在兩院制立法機(jī)構(gòu)中，其中一院不能違背立法方其他合作伙伴的意愿，單獨(dú)進(jìn)行訴訟?！?/p>

金斯伯格還表示，“如果該州指定參議院代表其利益，州參議院也確實(shí)履行了這一使命，我們將認(rèn)同州參議院可以代表該州立場(chǎng)。然而，這兩個(gè)先決條件在此都未得到滿足?！?/p>

在反對(duì)派的意見中，法官小塞繆爾·阿利托寫道，弗吉尼亞州參議院受到了傷害，完全有權(quán)提起訴訟，他在辯詞中甚至使用體育運(yùn)動(dòng)進(jìn)行類比。

“正是由于劃定選區(qū)的方式、立法機(jī)構(gòu)的組成以及立法機(jī)構(gòu)所做工作之間存在種種聯(lián)系，人們才投入了如此多的精力劃分選區(qū)，表達(dá)質(zhì)疑，進(jìn)行辯論。”小阿利托寫道，“弦樂四重奏樂團(tuán)對(duì)大提琴家的身份感興趣嗎？”他問道?！盎@球隊(duì)對(duì)控球后衛(wèi)的身份感興趣嗎？”

首席大法官小約翰·羅伯茨、大法官塞繆爾·布雷耶和布雷特·卡瓦諾也同樣持不同意見。

弗吉尼亞州首席檢察官馬克·赫林在一份聲明中說，6月17日最高法院的裁決是民主的勝利。

赫林說：“不幸的是，州參議院的共和黨人浪費(fèi)了納稅人數(shù)百萬美元，花了幾個(gè)月時(shí)間訴訟，試圖為種族歧視性不公平劃分選區(qū)的做法護(hù)航，但徒勞無功。但好消息是，今年秋季的選舉將按照符合憲法的選區(qū)劃分舉行?！?/p>

美國前總統(tǒng)貝拉克·奧巴馬任內(nèi)的司法部部長(zhǎng)埃里克·霍爾德于6月17日在推特上表示，這項(xiàng)裁決對(duì)那些自從2011年來就被迫在因種族歧視不公正劃分的選區(qū)投票的弗吉尼亞人意義重大，原來的選區(qū)劃分損害了他們的投票權(quán)。

“今天最高法院的裁決對(duì)弗吉尼亞州的非裔美國人來說是重大勝利，他們被迫在因種族歧視被不公正劃分的選區(qū)投票，這些選區(qū)剝奪了他們應(yīng)有的權(quán)力。非常可恥。今年秋天，所有弗吉尼亞人都將能夠參與公正的選舉?！被魻柕抡f。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：Agatha

Gerrymandering occurs when voting districts are redrawn to benefit one party over another in elections, forcing the other side to “waste” votes. For example, someone drawing district lines might bunch opposition party voters together in one district in order to concentrate their votes so that they influence only a few seats.

The high court said in a 22-page opinion the G.O.P.-controlled house didn’t have a legal right to challenge a previous lower court opinion that struck down several district maps they had drawn as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. As a result of the ruling, court-ordered maps favoring Democrats will remain in use.

Or, it could mean grouping those opposition voters into districts where the other party gains a hold on power, making it very difficult for the opposing party to win elections.

The Supreme Court took the case after Virginia’s House of Delegates filed an appeal after the state’s attorney general, a Democrat, decided not to appeal the ruling striking down the voting maps.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the opinion for a 5-4 decision in the case, Virginia House of Delegates v. Bethune-Hill, getting both liberal and conservative backing from Justices Clarence Thomas, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Neil Gorsuch.

With the court dismissing the challenge on standing grounds, the justices didn’t rule if the maps constitute an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

“The House observes that Virginia gives redistricting authority to the ‘General Assembly.’ True enough,” Ginsburg wrote. “(But) One House of its bicameral legislature cannot alone continue the litigation against the will of its partners in the legislative process.

“If the State had designated the House to represent its interests, and if the House had in fact carried out that mission, we would agree that the House could stand in for the State. Neither precondition, however, is met here,” Ginsburg continued.

In opposition, Justice Samuel Alito Jr. wrote that the Virginia House of Delegates suffered an injury and had every right to pursue a lawsuit, even using a sports analogy in his defense.

“It is precisely because of the connections between the way districts are drawn, the composition of a legislature and the things that a legislature does that so much effort is invested in drawing, contesting and defending districting plans,” Alito Jr. wrote. “Does a string quartet have an interest in the identity of its cellist?” he asked. “Does a basketball team have an interest in the identity of its point guard?”

Alito Jr. was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., and Justices Samuel Breyer and Brett Kavanaugh in dissent.

Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring said in a statement that Supreme Court ruling on June 17 is a win for democracy.

“It’s unfortunate that House Republicans wasted millions of taxpayer dollars and months of litigation in a futile effort to protect racially gerrymandered districts, but the good news is that this fall’s elections will take place in constitutionally drawn districts,” Herring said.

Eric Holder, the former U.S. attorney general under former president Barack Obama, said in a tweet on June 17 that the ruling is significant for those Virginians forced since 2011 to vote in racially gerrymandered districts that unjustly undermined the privilege to vote.

“Today’s ruling from the Supreme Court is an important victory for African Americans in Virginia who have been forced to vote in racially gerrymandered districts that kept rightful power away from them. Shameful. Fair elections will finally happen this fall for ALL Virginians,” Holder said.