Part 11/14:
But critics argue that these policies, intended as temporary corrections, have become permanent fixtures that institutionalize racial divisions. They contend that a truly fair democracy should treat every voter equally, judging individuals by their character and ideas, not categorizing them into racial groups.
The Supreme Court’s decision could signify a philosophical turning point: Is progress represented by colorblind policies that aim for integration and equality in voting? Or does erasing these race-based protections risk returning to a period of racial gerrymandering and disenfranchisement?