Wait, An NAACP Lawyer Did Not Just Say That About The Voting Rights Act

Posted • October 15, 2025: Jeff will have more on the oral arguments in Louisiana v. Callais, which concerns race-based legislative districts and could gut a key provision of the Voting Rights Act. It’s a case that if liberals lose, could see massive implications for the 2026 midterms. And yes, some of the arguments made by lawyers fighting to keep this provision in place are downright embarrassing. An NAACP lawyer said that race-based congressional districts are essential, since white Democrats don’t support black candidates regardless of party affiliation. You cannot make this up. —— NAACP lawyer argues at the Supreme Court that it's necessary to create race-based congressional districts because "white Democrats were not voting for black candidates whether they were Democrats or not." —— That’s not true. In fact, one could argue that liberal white women are the reason the Democrats haven’t fallen into total irrelevancy.

Second, white liberals are the most hyper-aggressive about these issues and have voted in droves for black candidates. Party affiliation be damned, frankly. These white Democrats now vote based on race alone. The only thing that stops them is seeing an “R” next to the name. There is nothing more insufferable than the white, college-educated progressive who even repels nonwhite voters, which we’ve seen since 2020. I’m sure more nuggets of lunacy will drop later today. Oh, this makes sense: This is the lawyer for the NAACP arguing in favor of the artificial creating majority black districts at the Supreme Court today saying she was "heartbroken" over the death of communist cop killer Assata Shakur. https://x.com/JNelsonLDF/status/1972299201129152946

Townhall: Wait, an NAACP Lawyer Did Not Just Say That About the Voting Rights Act
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2025/10/15/wait-an-naacp-lawyer-did-not-just-say-that-about-the-voting-rights-act-n2664993