Conservatives on the Supreme Court dealt what amounts to a “death blow” to the Voting Rights Act.

But you don’t have to be a legal scholar to understand what really matters here.

The effect is to dilute the voting power of Black people and other people of color who tend to vote Democratic.

But the entire decision rests on a faulty understanding of racism and how to address it.

This assumption has a name: colorblindness. It is not a virtue.

If race caused the inequality, then race must be named in order to create equity.

• What the Supreme Court just did to the Voting Rights Act and why some are calling it a “death blow”
• How shifting from discriminatory impact to intent makes voting rights cases nearly impossible to win
• Why this decision could dilute Black voting power while appearing race-neutral
• The long history of voting rights—from Dred Scott v. Sandford to the Fifteenth Amendment to the Voting Rights Act of 1965
• How racism adapts over time and why “race-neutral” laws can still produce unequal outcomes
• The flawed logic of colorblindness and why ignoring race doesn’t solve racial inequality
• Why many churches are ill-equipped to respond to this moment—and how that happened
• Practical ways to mobilize, dissent, and take action—from local engagement to national advocacy

The best way to support The Justice Briefing is to become a paid subscriber: JemarTisby.Substack.com

Book a screening of our short documentary: Jesus Was a Migrant