Home » Posts tagged 'Equality'
Tag Archives: Equality
Landmark Redistricting Cases in the Supreme Court and their Influence on U.S. Electoral Equality
By Steven Yang
Landmark Redistricting Cases in the Supreme Court and their Influence on U.S. Electoral Equality
Editor’s Note: This paper was completed as a part of the History Research Fellowship, a one-semester course available to sixth form students.
Student-Submitted Note: This paper was completed as part of the VI Form History Fellowship class, and focuses on the history of the Supreme Court’s involvement in redistricting, the process by which areas are broken up into political districts for each representative to serve. It starts with a summary of the parts of the Constitution pertinent to understand the topic, then chronologically understands the history of redistricting in the context of Supreme Court cases.
The Constitution of the United States begins with “We the People,” a famous phrase expressing the democratic principles of equality and power derived from the people; yet, there lies a dissonance between these principles and contemporary American politics, particularly within elections. Electoral laws can greatly influence results; controversial practices like strict voter ID laws and eliminating the ability to vote early or use mail-in ballots can lower voter turnout and heavily sway elections. One of the most egregious examples of these democratic principles, however, is called gerrymandering. Because state legislatures are tasked by the Constitution to draw districts elected officials represent, politicians can “entrench” themselves in office by drawing maps favorable to them. The process of drawing these districts on a decennial basis is known as redistricting, and redistricting that is aimed to benefit a certain group of people is called gerrymandering. While the most common form of modern gerrymandering is partisan gerrymandering, where politicians draw maps to benefit their party, other types of gerrymandering like racial gerrymandering have occurred in the past.3 At its worst, gerrymandering can be the equivalent of rigging elections. An antithesis to the core democratic principles the United States was built upon, gerrymandering is a flagrant violation of democracy so widespread that it has become synonymous with American life.
Legal challenges to unfair redistricting began in the 1940s, and redistricting has been a routine issue for the court to address up to the modern day. Many cases escalated to the Supreme Court, whose rulings on redistricting can have momentous effects. Early cases through the 1960s largely focused on malapportionment, a form of unfair redistricting where some voter’s voices are diluted because they live in political districts that were much larger in population than others. The court was generally willing to impose more requirements of redistricted maps to ensure equality, like mandating political districts must be roughly the same population. The 1980s to 2000s saw the court rule on other types of unfair redistricting, notably racial and partisan gerrymandering. However, when encountering questions of partisan gerrymandering, partisan bias of the court became increasingly evident. Combined with increased political polarization, the makeup of the consistently conservative courts during at the turn of the 21st century quickly became overwhelmingly partisan, favoring the Republicans who appointed justices in their roles. This represented a drastic departure from precedent and from democratic values as a whole. The court’s decisions are monumental, and by essentially deregulating partisan gerrymandering in recent cases, gerrymandering has become even more widespread than before.
This paper explores the history of redistricting and gerrymandering chronologically, starting with clauses and amendments within the U.S. Constitution that are vital to understanding the abundant litigation that occurred later. Next, it examines the United States’ approach to solving the issue of apportionment; a closely related issue to redistricting that determines how many Congressional representatives each state receives. Finally, the history of apportionment is contrasted with redistricting, answering the question: why can’t a similar solution be found for redistricting?
(more…)
Serving Up Equality: The Quest in Women’s Tennis
By Tate Frederick, IV Form
Serving Up Equality: The Quest in Women’s Tennis
With the rampant gender inequality in professional sports, tennis could easily be considered one of the least sexist due to its recently equalized prize money. In fact, the World Economic Forum recently wrote that “the Women’s Tennis Association [is] pushing the women’s game and pioneering gender equality” (Edmond). Contrary to public perception, the professional tennis circuit still has to make significant improvements in order to achieve gender equality. The financial distribution still heavily favors men, some of the rules perpetuate sexist values, and unfair stereotyping of female players is frequent.
Despite the fact that prize money became equal in 2007, women still make far less than male players. On the Forbes’ list of top-earning athletes, Serena Williams only comes in 51st, behind five male players, even though she has won more grand slam titles than any player, regardless of gender, in history, and holds endorsements with companies such as Nike, Gatorade, and JPMorganChase (Wang). Williams has earned tens of millions of dollars less than Novak Djokovic even though she has won many more titles than he has (Macur), due to the overall amount of prize money. If Williams, arguably one of the greatest athletes of all time, can’t achieve equal pay in comparison to her less-winning counterparts, where is the hope for women in less acclaimed positions? By maintaining this inequality, the tennis circuit is discouraging and discrediting the achievements of women in the sport. (more…)
The Future Is Female
By Dr. Heather Harwood, Classics Department Head
The Future Is Female
The women’s movement in America informed much of my development from a girl to a woman and has defined my identity as more than any other social or cultural event. Growing up in the 1970’s I watched and listened with a child’s wondering eyes and ears as the role of women in society blossomed and evolved all around me. I was exposed to children’s programs like Free to Be You and Me, a musical entertainment project that promoted radical gender and racial equality. I also remember watching the television program Mary Tyler Moore with my parents, a show considered progressive at the time, that followed the life of a young single woman making her way in the traditionally male dominated world of television journalism. In high school, I chose topics for research papers on women’s issues, from the Susan B. Anthony and the Women’s Suffragist Movement to Roe Vs. Wade to the Equal Rights Amendment. (more…)
Racial Colorblindness: The Solution to a Delusional Society?
By Sophie Haugen, IV Form
Racial Colorblindness: The Solution to a Delusional Society?
Lois Lowry’s dystopian community of sameness in The Giver appears to be perfect, but this is not true. This world of sameness represses individuality, creating a meaningless world without love. Imagine our world – progressive and controversial – without difference. Upon first glance it seems ideal; no conflict about humanity’s differences or room for judgement. But, would there be any culture or diversity at all? Lowry’s creation of a colorblind society warns our own that while we should strive for equality, “colorblindness” isn’t the answer. Racial colorblindness has been part of discussions around affirmative action in college admissions and the Constitution. Colorblindness is exactly what it sounds like: blindness to skin color, race, and any variety these bring. As an ideal, it’s well-intentioned, but in reality it is a way to pretend race doesn’t exist and to ignore racism as social problem, as well as devalue the importance of culture and difference. (more…)
LEO 