[BryantD]

Look at all those details omitted!

This was an indigenous people treaty case, and when mothballed says "certain public elections" they mean "a single election for a position in Hawaii which was established in negotiations with indigenous Hawaiians in the 1970s. Not, however, a treaty obligation.

I don't know that I agree with RGB here, but I don't find that to be a racist opinion.

[mothballed]

I love it. A video depicting both white and black people as non-human primates is more racist than literally using the might of the state to try and block excluded races from voting for a public office.

This is part of the reason why the nominally anti-racist zealots are losing the battle. We want to live in a world where it's actually considered racist to exclude races in a public election, rather than one where it's not racist to exclude races from a public election but somehow more racist to post a multi-racial video depicting whites and others as non-human animals.

[cosmicgadget]

Would you say a 25 year old opinion by a single dead Supreme Court justice is more damaging to your supposed platform than voter ID laws, gerrymandering, and the attack on vote by mail?