 |
| Democrats and Republicans pursued Asian American votes in Nevada in 2024. |
Unable to win the popular vote in an election, the Republican Party is finagling every which way to dissuade or block Democratic voters, including the majority of Asian American, Native American and Pacific Islander electorate.
For those of us in the AANHPI community, the writing isn’t just on the wall—it’s being carved into the law books. With the Supreme Court’s latest hatchet job on the Voting Rights Act, the legal armor we’ve relied on since the 1960s hasn’t just been dented; it’s been stripped away.
The recent SCOTUS pivot in Louisiana v. Callais effectively puts a tombstone on Section 2 of the VRA. For decades, this was our go-to weapon against "cracking"—the cynical practice of splitting up Asian American neighborhoods so our voices are drowned out by the surrounding districts. Now, the Court has given a wink and a nod to map-makers, allowing them to dilute our voting power under the thin veil of "partisan politics."
But the impact goes deeper than just lines on a map. By raising the bar for proving discrimination to near-impossible heights, the Court is ignoring the reality of the AANHPI experience. We’re talking about the quiet erasure of language assistance at the polls, the shuttering of ballot boxes in growing immigrant hubs, and the "show me your papers" intimidation tactics that target our most vulnerable elders.
The message from the high court is clear: if you can't beat 'em, rig the game. As the fastest-growing electorate in the country, AANHPI voters represent a demographic shift that some in power find terrifying. Instead of competing for our ideas, the strategy has shifted to making sure our ballots never reach the box—or that they don't count when they do.
We’re moving into a "post-VRA" world where the federal government is no longer the referee. The fight now moves to the state houses and the streets. If we want to keep our seat at the table, we’re going to have to fight twice as hard to protect the right to pull the lever.
Impact on California
In California, where we often feel like we're in a progressive bubble, the Supreme Court’s recent gutting of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) is popping that illusion. By dismantling the federal guardrails that prevent racial gerrymandering and vote dilution, SCOTUS has essentially invited a new wave of legal challenges that could unravel decades of gains in AANHPI representation.
California’s AANHPI communities are entering a high-stakes redistricting cycle where "cracking"—the intentional splitting of a community to dilute its vote—is no longer as easy to stop in federal court and those in power will be less inclined to cater to ethnic neighborhoods.
The immediate threat to the state legislature isn't just about today; it's about the future of how we draw the lines after the 2030 Census.
California’s independent commission has been a model for fairness, but Republicans could now use the SCOTUS "partisan" loophole to challenge existing maps. The "Partisan" Shield: If the commission is seen as favoring Democrats, the Court's new standard makes it nearly impossible to prove that a map also dilutes AANHPI power.
Splitting Silicon Valley, San Francisco
When the 2030 census rolls around, the mandate to protect minority-majority districts will be significantly weaker, potentially leading to "cracked" districts in areas with surging AANHPI populations.
In counties like Santa Clara, home of Silicon Valley, where the AANHPI community has finally reached a "critical mass," the VRA’s demise is a direct hit to local power.
Santa Clara County recently saw its first AANHPI supermajority on the Board of Supervisors. Without Section 2 protections, those newly drawn "unity maps" that represent concentrated Asian American neighborhoods in Districts 1 and 3 are now vulnerable to being redrawn and split up.
Assembly District 17, which houses Chinatown, the Filipino Heritage District and the Tenderloin, home to many Vietnamese families, is currently represented by Matt Haney. In a 2022 special election, Haney replaced David Chiu, who became the city's District Attorney. Some residents say they would prefer an Asian American representing them in Sacramento. Recent maps have already attempted to "crack" this 34% AANHPI district by adding affluent, white neighborhoods, potentially dropping AANHPI influence to 30%.
 |
| Filipino Americans have been able to get Filipinos onto the Daly City, Calif. city council. |
L.A, San Diego & ther redistricting chaos:
When the federal government stops looking, local boards are more likely to put non-English voter education materials on the chopping block during "budget crunches," as we've already seen attempted in the South Bay.
Cities like San Diego and Los Angeles, large concentrations of AANHPI neighborhoods could lose their impact and influence at city hall.The fight at the city level is where the "rigging" gets granular, specifically targeting at-large versus district elections.
The "cracking" of the San Gabriel Valley's AANHPI voting power across multiple districts is a perennial threat that Section 2 of the VRA used to mitigate; that shield is now effectively gone.
As the AANHPI electorate grows in San Diego, the SCOTUS ruling provides a roadmap for opponents to challenge district-based voting. They can argue that drawing districts to ensure AANHPI representation is "unconstitutional racial gerrymandering," forcing cities back into at-large systems where our votes are easily drowned out. View from the edge
Experts warn that the California Voting Rights Act itself could be the next target. If the federal courts decide that race-conscious map-making is illegal everywhere, our state-level protections could be struck down entirely.
"While the full impact of this ruling is still uncertain, we know from past experience that decisions striking down, or effectively gutting, provisions of the Voting Rights Act are often followed by new state laws that restrict access to the ballot for voters of color," said California's AG Rob Bonta, a Filipino American.
The high court's decision won't affect California's recently approved remapping of Congressional districts because they were based on partisansip, not race. State voters approved the redistricting last November to counter Texas' redistricting that favored Republicans.
This SCOTUS ruling reverses hard-won progress toward fair representation and responsive leadership. When communities are denied a fair opportunity for political power, the consequences extend far beyond elections, states APIAVote in a press release. Fair representation impacts whether communities can effectively advocate for better schools, affordable health care, safer bridges and roads, environmental protections, language access, and economic opportunity.
“At a time when our democracy should be working to include more voices, this ruling moves us in the wrong direction,” said Christine Chen, executive director of APIAVote. “Every voter has the right to elect representatives who understand and respond to their communities’ needs. We cannot allow hard-fought protections for minority voters to be eroded.”
EDITOR'S NOTE: For additional commentary, news, views and chismis from an AANHPI perspective, follow me on Threads, on X, BlueSky or at the blog Views From the Edge. If you find this perspective interesting, please repost.
