{"id":22485,"date":"2024-06-27T08:40:54","date_gmt":"2024-06-27T12:40:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.commoncause.org\/?post_type=article&p=22485"},"modified":"2024-08-30T08:41:29","modified_gmt":"2024-08-30T12:41:29","slug":"rucho-revisite-5-plats-a-emporter-pour-son-5e-anniversaire","status":"publish","type":"article","link":"https:\/\/www.commoncause.org\/fr\/articles\/rucho-revisited-5-takeaways-on-the-5-year-anniversary\/","title":{"rendered":"Rucho revisit\u00e9 : 5 points \u00e0 retenir pour le 5e anniversaire"},"template":"","class_list":["post-22485","article","type-article","status-publish","hentry","article_type-article"],"acf":{"details":{"summary":"On the fifth year anniversary of Rucho v. Common Cause, we reflect on the five most important takeaways from the decision, its impact, and the road ahead.","featured_image":"","article_type":11,"authors":"","related_issues":[103,2066],"related_work":false,"location":null},"sidebar":{"helper_enable_sidebar":false,"helper_media_contact":{"heading":"Media Contact","manually_enter_person":false,"person":"","name":"","role":"","phone":"","email":""},"helper_links_downloads":{"heading":"Links & Downloads","links":null}},"page_layout":[{"acf_fc_layout":"layout_wysiwyg","_acfe_flexible_toggle":"","component_wysiwyg":{"content":"Rucho contre Common Cause\u00a0<\/b>\r\n\r\nEn 2019, la Cour supr\u00eame des \u00c9tats-Unis a rendu l\u2019une des d\u00e9cisions les plus pr\u00e9judiciables \u00e0 la d\u00e9mocratie. Rucho contre Common Cause<\/i><\/a>, la Cour a statu\u00e9 que le d\u00e9coupage partisan des circonscriptions \u00e9lectorales est une question politique qui d\u00e9passe la comp\u00e9tence des tribunaux f\u00e9d\u00e9raux \u2013 c'est-\u00e0-dire que les tribunaux f\u00e9d\u00e9raux ne peuvent rien faire pour emp\u00eacher les partis politiques de manipuler les limites des circonscriptions \u00e9lectorales \u00e0 leur propre avantage.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nDe quoi s'agissait-il ?<\/i><\/b>\r\n\r\nRucho <\/i>a commenc\u00e9 en 2016<\/a> when Common Cause challenged North Carolina\u2019s congressional map in federal court. Despite Republicans receiving 53% of the statewide vote, they secured 10 of 13 seats.\r\n\r\nIn the same opinion, the Supreme Court also decided Lamone v. Benisek, a challenge to a Democratic gerrymander in Maryland. In that case , Democrats obtained 65% of the statewide vote but claimed 7 of 8 seats.\r\n\r\nOn the fifth year anniversary of this landmark decision, we reflect on the five most important takeaways from the decision, its impact, and the road ahead.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n\"\"\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n1. Le red\u00e9coupage partisan des circonscriptions s'est aggrav\u00e9<\/b>\r\n\r\nImm\u00e9diatement apr\u00e8s la d\u00e9cision, Common Cause a anticip\u00e9 une dangereuse vague de red\u00e9coupage \u00e9lectoral, une crainte qui s'est mat\u00e9rialis\u00e9e dans tout le pays. Comme Common Cause le d\u00e9taille dans notre Bulletin de red\u00e9coupage de CHARGE,<\/a> states in which legislators draw districts were plagued with a lack of transparency, disinterest in community testimony, and partisan manipulation of districts. A statistical analysis of states using several measures of partisan gerrymandering found that some of the worst offenders in the 2010 cycle - like Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, North Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin - somehow managed to score even worse on some measures in the 2020 cycle. The intentional manipulation of electoral district boundaries undermines the will of voters, violates fundamental principles of democracy, and disempowers millions of Americans. With the highly competitive 2024 election just months away, addressing gerrymandering is essential to ensuring that democracy remains intact and every American has an equal voice.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n2. Les l\u00e9gislateurs utilisent Rucho comme bouclier pour dissimuler le red\u00e9coupage \u00e9lectoral racial<\/b>\r\n\r\nThe Rucho decision created a loophole for legislators in states where they control the redistricting process, allowing them to engage in racial gerrymandering under the guise of targeting the opposing political party.\r\n\r\nThis defense played out in the recent Supreme Court case Alexander contre la Conf\u00e9rence de Caroline du Sud de la NAACP<\/i> (2024)<\/a>. Dans une d\u00e9cision \u00e0 6 contre 3, la Cour a confirm\u00e9 une carte \u00e9lectorale du Congr\u00e8s qui discriminait les r\u00e9sidents noirs de l'\u00c9tat. La majorit\u00e9 a accept\u00e9 l'argument des l\u00e9gislateurs selon lequel leur intention \u00e9tait d'influencer les tendances partisanes au sein du district, ce qui, selon Rucho<\/i>, falls outside the jurisdiction of federal courts.\r\n\r\nThis ruling sets a troubling precedent. Il est d\u00e9sormais permis de discriminer les \u00e9lecteurs d\u2019une communaut\u00e9 de couleur inscrits sous un parti politique, sous le masque de la \u00ab politique partisane \u00bb. <\/b>En permettant au d\u00e9coupage partisan des circonscriptions de servir de couverture \u00e0 la discrimination raciale, la Cour a mis en p\u00e9ril des d\u00e9cennies d\u2019\u00e9galit\u00e9 raciale et de droit de vote.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n3. Les syst\u00e8mes de red\u00e9coupage \u00e9lectoral s'effondrent alors que la pression publique sur les l\u00e9gislateurs s'intensifie<\/b>\r\n\r\n\u00c0 la suite de Rucho<\/i>Les l\u00e9gislateurs ont fait tout ce qu\u2019ils pouvaient pour prot\u00e9ger leur pouvoir de red\u00e9coupage, mais nous commen\u00e7ons \u00e0 voir des fissures dans leur d\u00e9fense. \u00c0 l\u2019\u00e8re moderne du red\u00e9coupage, il a \u00e9t\u00e9 presque impossible d\u2019amener les l\u00e9gislateurs \u00e0 limiter leur propre pouvoir. Cependant, la prise de conscience croissante et la pression publique signifient d\u00e9sormais que les politiciens ne peuvent plus ignorer la demande d\u2019une repr\u00e9sentation \u00e9quitable. Le mouvement pour un red\u00e9coupage \u00e9quitable prend de l\u2019ampleur dans tout le pays :\r\n