Redistricting Wars & Abortion Pill Access

0:00If you follow markets, you know the value of long-term thinking. You plan, you diversify, you prepare for volatility. But in life, even the best strategies can't prevent every bad day. A fire, a loss, a disruption that demands immediate attention. When that happens, what matters isn't just what you planned, it's who shows up. That's where Cincinnati Insurance comes in. For more than 75 years, they've helped individuals and businesses navigate life's toughest moments with care, expertise, and personal attention. Together with independent agents, Cincinnati Insurance focuses on relationships, not transactions.

0:37Their approach is grounded in experience, follow-through, and trust built over time. Bad days happen, and when they do, you deserve an insurance partner who understands risk, respects what you've built, and is ready to help you move forward. The Cincinnati insurance companies. Let them make your bad day better. Find an independent agent at c-i-n-f-i-n.com. So there's a lot of noise about AI, but time's too tight for more promises. So let's talk about results. At IBM, we work with our employees to integrate technology right into the systems they need. Now, a global workforce of 300 ,000 can use AI to fill their HR questions, resolving 94 % of common questions.

1:19Not noise. Proof of how we can help companies get smarter by putting AI where it actually pays off. Deep in the work that moves the business. Let's create smarter business. IBM. You need to make a huge presentation in an hour. Adobe Acrobat uses AI to take all your documents and generate a presentation with a single click. Build slides quickly and streamline the process. Need a last minute pitch deck? Do that with Acrobat. Need to level up your presentation design? Do that with Acrobat. You have 30-plus documents that need to be simplified into a proposal. Do that. Do that. Do that with Acrobat.

1:59Learn more at adobe.com slash do that with Acrobat. You're listening to Bloomberg Law with June Grosso from Bloomberg Radio. The Supreme Court's conservative majority handed Republicans their biggest victory yet in the battle to control the House by gutting the Voting Rights Act last Wednesday. The consequences are already playing out as Republican-led states try to pass new maps to eliminate Democratic-held seats for the midterms. The challenge is the timing. Well, after filing deadlines for this year's primary elections, and in some cases after those primary elections have been held. In Louisiana, where the state's map was found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in the Calais decision, primary elections had already started and the governor suspended House races so the legislature could draw a new map.

3:00But voters, voting groups and candidates have filed multiple lawsuits in state and federal courts to try to stop that process. Here's Democratic Louisiana Congressman Cleo Fields. For the governor and the secretary of state to halt the election in the middle of voting, disenfranchise thousands of voters in Louisiana, and to me is un-American and unconstitutional in my view. My guest is Jonathan Diaz, Director of Voting Advocacy and Partnerships at the Campaign Legal Center. Jonathan, it's only been five days since the Supreme Court's decision eviscerating the Voting Rights Act. But are we already seeing the early results of that decision?

3:46So the Supreme Court's decision in Calais versus Louisiana has really fundamentally altered the scope of federal legal protections for voting rights. It is the latest in what has been a long series of decisions by the Roberts Court over the last 15 years, slowly chipping away at the Voting Rights Act, the crown jewel of the civil rights movement. And with this sort of final blow, it has really rendered the Voting Rights Act, as Justice Kagan said in her dissent, a dead letter. In this decision, in Brnovich, another decision from 2021, even in Shelby County back in 2013, the majority is very careful to say that they are not overturning the Voting Rights Act.

4:30They are not declaring the whole Voting Rights Act unconstitutional. It's still there. But they have functionally made it unenforceable. And what that has done now in May of an election year is turbocharged the already aggressive redistricting battles that we've been seeing play out over the last several months, leading states across the country, but primarily in the South, to aggressively try to redraw their congressional maps before this year's midterm elections to eliminate majority minority districts and functionally erase meaningful representation for primarily Black and Latino voters across the American South, including in states that have already held primary elections or that are in the middle of primary elections right now.

5:15So it's really a sort of craven and opportunistic attempt to redraw these maps for partisan gain at the expense of minority voters. So where does the map stand right now? So the only state that has entirely enacted a new map since the Calais decision is Florida. They were ready. They passed their map within hours of that decision coming down. And since then, a number of other states, either governors have called special sessions of their legislatures to draw new maps or they've begun the process of redoing their maps. And that is complicated in a place like Alabama that already has had a primary, in a place like Louisiana where their primary is in just a little over a week and voting has already begun.

6:02Ballots have already been cast. But it's, you know, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, South Carolina have all, you know, announced plans to target the majority minority districts that were created as a result of successful litigation under the Voting Rights Act in their states and specifically targeting primarily black lawmakers elected in majority black districts. When they eliminate these majority minority black districts, is it a guarantee? Is it a lock that a Democrat can't get elected there? Are they able to gerrymander it in such a way? Not necessarily. It does depend a little bit on the state and on the state's particular geography.

6:42But the redistricting process has become so technical and so driven by computer programs and map drawers have gotten increasingly sophisticated over recent years. And so it is very plausible to be able to draw a map where it would be nearly impossible for a Democrat to get elected because of just the way that the lines have been drawn, especially now that the Supreme Court has basically blessed this practice and has said that you can target voters of color so long as you claim that you're doing it for partisan reasons. So as long as the state says, well, we're not discriminating against them because they're black or Latino, we're discriminating against them because they're Democrats, the Supreme Court majority has said that's OK.

7:27Louisiana's Governor Jeff Landry, in delaying his state's House primary elections in order to redraw the state's map, quoted that famous quote from the Chief Justice John Roberts. The best way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race. And there have been lawsuits filed to stop the redistricting. But what are they based on now that they can no longer base it on discrimination on the basis of race? There's a lot to unpack there. Yeah, I apologize for the double question or maybe the triple question. But that quote from Chief Justice Roberts is pretty disingenuous because what the court has really functionally done is said that even if you can prove that discrimination has happened, you cannot consider race when remedying discrimination.

8:20And I'm not sure how you can fashion a legal remedy to address race discrimination while being blind to race. It just doesn't make sense. So setting that aside, you know, the governor of Louisiana, in my view, does not have the authority to just unilaterally postpone the primary because of a change in law. There is an emergency statute that does give the governor and the secretary of state some limited ability to change election dates. But that is reserved for actual unforeseen catastrophes, which in Louisiana usually means a hurricane. And so, you know, when it is functionally impossible to hold an election because, you know, a natural disaster has occurred.

9:03And what the governor is doing here is, I think, really cynically and opportunistically abusing that authority to cancel an election already in progress because he wants to redraw maps to get his party more congressional seats. And so the claims that are being brought by litigants in Louisiana are not about the maps themselves or not about, you know, discriminating against voters in this particular instance. You know, these are due process claims. These are ultra-virus claims. They're arguing that the governor has exceeded his legal authority by, you know, calling it an emergency and rescheduling the election when there is no actual emergency.

9:40That's not what the statute and the emergency power were designed for. And he's functionally canceling the votes that have already been cast by, you know, Louisianans who have voted earlier, voted by mail, because this election period has been ongoing now for a couple of weeks. So the legal actions that have been brought are on behalf of individual voters who've already cast ballots. And they want those ballots counted because, you know, there are changes in law, there are changes in circumstance all the time. But what we don't do in a democracy is cancel an election midstream. You can't change the rules halfway through the election just because you want a different outcome.

10:17The Supreme Court has established the Purcell principle, the idea that courts shouldn't change voting or election rules too close to an election in order to avoid confusion. At this point, I'm not sure which principles or rules the court will still follow as precedent. But does that apply here? It's interesting. Purcell does not appear anywhere in the Supreme Court's decision in Calais. And the court has been very aggressive in citing Purcell to prevent district courts from issuing rulings about elections that might be disruptive to the election administration process or cause voter confusion.

10:57And I can't think of a more disruptive decision than gutting the Voting Rights Act in the middle of a midterm year while primaries are ongoing. And the court could have done all sorts of things to delay this decision taking effect, to make clear to the states that this election cycle shouldn't be affected by it. They didn't do that. And so the court's use of Purcell, I think, has been quite cynical and pretty opportunistic. They use it when they want to block a lower court ruling, but they don't themselves seem very bound by it. And so the guidance that they've given to the district courts about being careful about not to disrupt elections with judicial decisions, about how courts shouldn't change things midstream, it does not seem to be guidance that they themselves have followed here.

11:42Going through some of the states, Tennessee, well, Trump said on Truth Social that the Tennessee Republican governor would work hard to redraw the state's map. Although Tennessee code prohibits congressional mid-decade redistricting, I mean, will anything happen in Tennessee or Alabama where the governor had said that, you know, the state's map couldn't be altered and now she's apparently announcing plans to call a special session? Do you think that anything would happen in either of those two states? It's certainly possible. I mean, you know, in Tennessee, they would have to change the code, which the legislature could do that.

12:20But, you know, we've seen already, I mean, in Florida, the Florida Constitution prohibits partisan gerrymandering. And Florida has passed a map redrawing the districts for partisan advantage. So, you know, many of these governors and legislatures don't seem to be too concerned about what limits the law puts on them at this point, maybe in part because of the pressure that they're getting from the White House. But I think it's important to remember that all of these states were already pretty aggressively gerrymandered after the 2020 census. Tennessee has one Democratic district in Memphis, which is a majority black district, because they split Nashville.

12:57They cracked it into four separate districts to eliminate a Democratic seat in Nashville. Alabama had a case go up to the Supreme Court just a couple of years ago where the district court found that Alabama had intentionally discriminated on the basis of race. in drawing its congressional map. And they were forced because of a violation of the Voting Rights Act to draw a second majority Black district. And so it's hard to say whether the court is turning a blind eye or was intentionally just like unleashing this wave of extreme gerrymandering. But it seems to me, at least, these governors and these state legislatures are not holding anything back in their quest to eliminate minority representation in their states.

13:37Let's talk about 2028, because some of the states that are saying, no, we can't do it now, like Georgia. The Georgia governor, Brian Kemp, said it's clear that Calais requires Georgia to adopt new electoral maps before the 2028 election cycle. Let's talk about Republican states first. Which Republican states do you think still have maps they're able to gerrymander to get rid of Democrats? There are plenty. I think it's states all across the South. But looking ahead to 2028, I don't think it's just Republican states that we have to think about. I think the same way that we saw Texas and California and Virginia and Ohio all going kind of tit for tat in the last year, the race to the bottom is only going to accelerate.

14:21Because if Florida and Georgia and Alabama and Mississippi and Louisiana and all of these states in the Deep South are successful in redrawing their maps to eliminate Democrats, I expect places like Maryland and Illinois and Colorado to retaliate. And nobody wins when the parties are engaged in this race to the bottom of just trying to manipulate the electorate for their own partisan gain. The loser here is not going to be the Republicans or the Democrats. It's going to be the American people who are going to be denied a meaningful opportunity to select representatives who actually represent them.

15:04You know, there's a kind of common saying that we we use a lot. Voters should choose their politicians, not the other way around. And what this decision from the Supreme Court has done is functionally given state legislatures the ability to decide for themselves what party is going to represent their states in Congress and taken the power to make that choice away from the voters just by manipulating the district lines on the map. Coming up next, will independent commissions be a barrier for democratic states trying to redistrict? This is Bloomberg. Support for the show comes from Public. Public is an investing platform that offers access to stocks, options, bonds, and crypto.

15:46And they've also integrated AI with tools that can assist investors in building customized portfolios. One of these tools is called Generated Assets. It allows you to turn your ideas into investable indexes. So let's say you're interested in something specific like biotech companies with high R &D spend, small cap stocks with improving operating margins, or the S &P 500 minus high debt companies. Chances are there isn't an ETF that fits your exact criteria. But on public, you just type in a prompt and their AI screens thousands of stocks and builds a one of a kind index. You can even backtest it against the S &P 500.

16:21Then you can invest in a few clicks. Go to public.com slash market and earn an uncapped 1 % bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com slash market. And paid for by Public Holdings. Brokered services by Public Investing, member FINRA SIPC. Advisory services by Public Advisors, SEC Registered Advisor. Crypto services by ZeroHash. Sample prompts are for illustrative purposes only, not investment advice. All investing involves risk of loss. See complete disclosures at public.com slash disclosures. A business gift is never just a gift. It's a thank you, a milestone, a moment of appreciation.

16:57It's a message about how much someone matters and what your brand stands for. At 4imprint, you'll find thousands of customizable options, like premium apparel, branded drinkware, tech, totes, and more, each chosen not just for function, but for meaning. You can tailor every detail, your logo, your message, your presentation, so your gift feels personal and on-brand. And with expert support, dependable service, and thousands without a setup fee, creating something thoughtful doesn't mean making it complicated. Every order is backed by 4imprint's 360-degree guarantee, so you can be 4imprint certain it'll arrive exactly as expected, on time and with the care your brand deserves.

17:35Because when the moment matters, the right gift speaks volumes, and the right partner makes it easy. Explore gifting with purpose and certainty at 4imprint.com. 4imprint. 4certain. So there's a lot of noise about AI, but time's too tight for more promises. So let's talk about results. At IBM, we work with our employees to integrate technology right into the systems they need. Now, a global workforce of 300 ,000 can use AI to fill their HR questions, resolving 94 % of common questions. Not noise. Proof of how we can help companies get smarter by putting AI where it actually pays off. Deep in the work that moves the business.

18:14Let's create smarter business. IBM. Republican lawmakers in several southern states are meeting this week to consider plans that could upend their congressional primaries and redraw U.S. House districts ahead of the November elections, as the GOP moves to quickly capitalize on the Supreme Court ruling last week that eviscerated the Voting Rights Act. A special legislative session responding to the court ruling began today in Alabama and is set to start Tuesday in Tennessee. Louisiana lawmakers who are already in session also are looking at how to redraw their congressional districts. Civil rights activists have countered with rallies, protests and lawsuits challenging the new redistricting efforts.

19:05I've been talking to Jonathan Diaz, Director of Voting Advocacy and Partnerships at the Campaign Legal Center. So some of the Democratic states have an additional problem in that they passed laws allowing independent commissions to draw the maps. So, for example, Colorado has already started trying to undo its independent commission before 2028. And New York Governor Kathy Hochul called on lawmakers to begin the process of a constitutional amendment. So do you think those independent commissions will be a real hurdle for Democrats who want to redistrict or they can get around them? It does make things a little more complicated.

19:44Many of those independent commissions are, you know, written into the state constitutions. And so it's a little more difficult to amend a state constitution than, you know, to just pass a new bill, which is why I think you're seeing the Democratic response in a lot of the states in Colorado and New York aiming for 2028, because it does take a little bit longer. But, you know, Virginia just amended its constitution to do its mid-decade redistricting this year. California has a redistricting commission and the ballot measure that they put on the ballot suspends it for as long as they are in this fight with Texas.

20:15And so, yeah, I think it is a little bit more complicated for the Democratic controlled states that want to respond to what's happening. And that's because, you know, in at least some of those places, either Democratic governments, but more often voters themselves, have amended their constitutions to take the power to draw maps away from legislators. When Democrats controlled Congress, they attempted to pass and passed through the House a bill that would have in part banned partisan gerrymandering and mandated independent citizen commissions to draw congressional maps for every state. And that was uniformly opposed down party lines by Republicans.

20:56And so there has been some at least movement on the Democratic side of the aisle to address gerrymandering and to make redistricting more fair. But it has been a pretty one sided fight. And I think that, you know, unfortunately, because the Republicans are going at the districting process so aggressively, the Democrats are now responding in kind. And there is, it seems to me right now at this moment, very little appetite for districting reform on either side of the aisle. I'm hopeful that I think that both sides will see just how terrible this is once they both go scorched earth and might, you know, out of self-preservation, find some middle ground to address this.

21:38because, you know, there's more Democrats in Texas than in any other state other than California. And there are more Republicans in California than in any other state other than Texas because of just how many people are in both of those states. And Republicans in California deserve meaningful representation in Congress just as much as Democrats in Texas do. But once we give the power to draw these lines to self-interested legislators who have their own partisan goals and ambitions and objectives. Again, the people who really suffer are the voters. A progressive group, Fair Fight Action, identified 19 possible seats that Republicans could target if Section 2 was not in place.

22:21And they released another report laying out as many as 22 seats where Democrats could respond in kind. Could this end up with Republicans being in a worse position than before Trump started this redistricting war? It's possible. And I think that the range that the folks at Fair Fight identified was a little uncertain because we just weren't sure exactly how Kille was going to come down and how aggressive Republican states would be in redrawing their maps once it did. And I think the other open question was, what would Democrats do in response? And so, you know, it's hard to read the tea leaves to say who in the partisan horse race, who's going to come out on top on this particular round of redistricting.

23:05But, you know, I think what has been made very clear in the last couple of days since the Calais decision is that, you know, both parties are going all out to redraw the maps. I'm not sure, you know, just because of demographics and geography, you know, it's clear that the Republican controlled states are targeting majority black and Latino districts. I haven't taken a close look at whether we would see the same kind of reduction in majority minority districts in blue states if they responded in kind. But, yeah, I think it's clear based on the actions of governors and legislatures just over the last week that we're going to see a massive reduction in majority minority districts across the South as a result of this wave of districting spurred by Calais.

23:49So we always focus on Congress for obvious reasons, but this decision also affects state legislatures, county commissions, city councils, and even local school boards. Yeah, that's exactly right. I think most people don't realize just how transformative the Voting Rights Act was to American democracy, because it's not just Congress. You're right. It's state legislatures. It's local governments. It's county commissions. It's school boards. It's utility districts. It's city councils. Almost the more profound effect of the Voting Rights Act was, I think, to transform local governments, hitting people at home, right?

24:31The parts of government that touch people's lives most directly and most closely. And, you know, the congressional seats get a lot of attention and that's where a lot of litigation happens. But Section 2 as a backstop to make sure that states and localities didn't go too far in diluting minority votes was a really powerful tool that, you know, we can't enforce the way that we used to because of this decision. And it's really, you know, for as much as we are going to see minority representation decline in Congress, I think that the effect in state and local governments is going to be even more dramatic.

25:08And changing the congressional maps and the primary dates months before the elections in November creates so many other problems as well for candidates and confusion for voters. And it's going to be costly for the states. And for election officials themselves. The people who run elections, administrators, are in a state like Louisiana where the finish line was in sight. They were right there. They were so close to being done with this primary. And now the governor is telling them they have to start from scratch. Candidates are going to have to refile their candidacy petitions in new districts.

25:49They might have to collect signatures again. All the money that they've spent on these campaigns, on ads, on volunteers, on staff, on T-shirts, mailers, you name it, they're going to have to do all over again. It's going to be incredibly confusing for voters who have already participated in a primary or who you know, decided not to and now have to figure it all out again. People may have taken time off of work to go to the polls. It's going to be incredibly disruptive and confusing for voters. And any disruption this major, especially in the election climate that we've been in for the last several years, it does two things.

26:30It reduces public confidence in our electoral system. If people feel like their vote doesn't matter or that the system is rigged to put out a particular outcome, regardless of what they do, that's really damaging to democracy in the long term. And secondly, you know, we have seen since 2020 a willingness on the part of candidates and elected officials to subvert or reject the results of elections because they don't like the outcome, whether they do try and do that through litigation or through, you know, other kind of legal challenge or just, you know, declaring the election stolen and hoping that the people follow them to, you know, do whatever.

27:14We all remember how, you know, the aftermath of the 2020 election. And I worry that this kind of massive disruption is going to lead to similar calls by the president, people in his orbit, you know, like minded governors and candidates to reject the outcomes of elections if they don't align with their partisan preference. And Congress could pass a law to get around this Supreme Court decision, right? Yes, Congress could tomorrow pass a law banning partisan gerrymandering, saying that, you know, partisan gain, partisan advantage is not a legitimate criterion for states to use in drawing congressional maps.