Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter, YouTube
The Supreme Court just ended a blatant form of racial segregation in American elections. In Louisiana v. Callais, decided April 29, 2026, the 6-3 majority ruled that Louisiana’s congressional map — deliberately drawn with race as the predominant factor to create a second majority-Black district stretching like a grotesque 250-mile slash across the state — was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. It violated the Equal Protection Clause. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act cannot be twisted into a mandate for sorting voters into racial pens. The map was struck down. States must stop using skin color as the primary tool for drawing district lines.
Cue the predictable meltdown from African-American Democrats and black television pundits. They are not celebrating the end of government-mandated racial segregation in voting maps. They are screaming that Jim Crow has returned. And the specific comments from the usual suspects are not just wrong — they are jaw-droppingly stupid, historically illiterate, and reveal exactly who is still pushing the racial division they claim to hate.
Take Stacey Abrams, the failed Georgia gubernatorial candidate and professional voting-rights grifter. In her MSNBC column she declared: “The VRA ended Jim Crow. Full stop. With this decision, it’s open season — once again — on Black and brown voters at the ballot box.” On Facebook she added that the ruling “guts what was left of the Voting Rights Act and sets us farther on the path to authoritarianism.”
The flaw in Abrams’ comment is so obvious it hurts. The Voting Rights Act ended actual Jim Crow barriers — poll taxes, literacy tests, and violent suppression that stopped Black people from registering and voting. Callais did none of that. It simply said you cannot draw districts by first asking “how many Black voters can we pack here?” That practice is racial classification, not protection. Abrams is defending the very system of racial gerrymandering that treats Black voters as a bloc to be herded and non-Black voters as the leftover scraps. Calling color-blind maps “open season” on Black voters is not analysis — it is the racist assumption that Black Americans cannot win elections unless the government rigs the lines in their favor. Abrams is too dim or too dishonest to admit that true equal protection means every citizen’s vote counts the same, regardless of race. Her outrage is pure projection: she wants racial spoils, not equality.
Then there is Bishop Talbert Swan II, the pastor and activist who told reporters: “Make no mistake, this ruling harkens back to the darkest days of the Jim Crow era, when Black Americans were kept out of rooms of power.”
This is not just wrong — it is moronic. Jim Crow kept Black Americans out of power through denial of the ballot itself. The Callais decision keeps the ballot fully open while forbidding states from drawing “Black districts” and “White districts” like apartheid planners. Swan is equating the end of racial sorting with the return of racial subjugation. It is the intellectual equivalent of calling the abolition of separate water fountains a return to segregation. The man is so blinded by grievance that he cannot see the Court just rejected the modern equivalent of “separate but equal” districts. His comment exposes him as a defender of racialism, not a fighter against it.
Rep. Jasmine Crockett, the Texas Democrat known more for viral soundbites than substance, released a statement calling the decision another reminder that “the fight for voting rights is far from over” and accusing the Court of gutting Section 2.
Crockett’s flaw is pure political self-interest dressed as principle. Many of her colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus owe their seats to the exact race-based maps the Court just curtailed. She is not fighting for “voting rights” — she is fighting to preserve racially engineered safe seats that guarantee Democratic wins and keep the grievance industry funded. The ruling did not gut the VRA; it stopped lower courts from using it as a racial quota machine. Crockett’s hysterics reveal she values predictable racial outcomes over the Constitution’s command that government treat citizens as individuals. It is stupid because any fifth-grader can see the difference between banning discrimination and mandating racial proportionality in district lines.
Louisiana’s own Rep. Troy Carter, one of the Black Democrats whose state map was at issue, called the ruling “a devastating blow to the promise of equal representation in our democracy” and whined that it is “about whether Black Louisianians will have a meaningful opportunity to make their voices heard.” His colleague Rep. Cleo Fields (whose own district was the racial monstrosity struck down) labeled it “a grave setback to voting rights and to the promise of equal political representation.”
Both men are defending the indefensible. The map they championed was ruled unconstitutional precisely because it subordinated every traditional redistricting principle — compactness, communities of interest, contiguity — to the goal of creating more “Black districts.” That is not equal representation; that is racial engineering that dilutes Black votes elsewhere while giving non-Black voters less say. Carter and Fields are arguing that Black Louisianians can only be “heard” if the government draws them into segregated super-districts. It is paternalistic nonsense. Black voters in competitive or majority-white districts have elected Black officials for decades without needing racial life support. These congressmen are too invested in the old system — and too intellectually lazy — to admit the Court just made representation fairer for everyone.
Rev. Al Sharpton, the cable-news race-baiter-in-chief, called the decision a “bullet in the heart of the voting rights movement.”
Sharpton’s comment is peak stupidity. The voting rights movement was about stopping governments from denying the ballot on racial grounds. Callais affirms that principle by stopping governments from classifying voters on racial grounds to engineer outcomes. Sharpton has built a career on pretending every setback to racial preferences is a return to 1964. He cannot grasp — or refuses to admit — that the Constitution’s equal protection guarantee applies to all races and forbids treating Black voters as a special class requiring racial districting forever. His “bullet” rhetoric is emotional blackmail, not legal analysis. It is the same tired script he has used for every affirmative action loss, every crime statistic discussion, every color-blind policy advance. The man is a professional outrage performer, and his audience is apparently too dumb to notice he is defending segregation while claiming to oppose it.
These are not isolated voices. They are the loudest ones amplified on cable television and in Democratic press releases. They all share the same flaw: they equate ending race-based districting with restoring the system that once denied Black votes entirely. It is historical malpractice of the highest order. Jim Crow was about exclusion through barriers. The Callais map — and the legal regime that produced it — was about inclusion through racial classification. The Supreme Court rejected the latter as unconstitutional. The screamers are defending the latter while pretending it is the former.
The stupidity is almost comedic if it were not so destructive. These black Democrats and pundits spent years accusing Republicans of “voter suppression” for wanting voter ID or clean rolls. Now they are the ones suppressing equal treatment by demanding that districts be drawn explicitly by race. They claim to hate Jim Crow’s legacy of division, yet they fight to keep Americans divided into racial voting blocs. They accuse others of wanting to “keep Black people out of rooms of power,” yet the system they defend packs Black voters into a handful of districts so their influence is minimized in the rest of the state. It is the political version of the separate-but-equal lie, and they are its most fervent modern defenders.
The real tragedy is that their dumbest constituents — the ones who trust these voices without question — are being sold a bill of goods. They are told that without racially gerrymandered “opportunity districts,” their votes will not count. That is a lie. Votes count when they are cast freely and counted equally. The Callais decision protects that principle. It does not silence Black voices; it refuses to let politicians silence all voices by racial manipulation.
Stacey Abrams, Jasmine Crockett, Al Sharpton, Bishop Talbert Swan, Troy Carter, Cleo Fields and the entire cable-news grievance chorus are not the heirs of civil rights heroes. They are the heirs of the segregationists who wanted to keep Americans sorted by race. Their comments are not principled stands — they are self-serving tantrums from people whose power depends on perpetual racial division. The Supreme Court just told them the game is over. Their hysterical, historically illiterate screams only prove how right the Court was.
Stay updated with the latest in the Constitution State with The CT Centinal
