You're being deliberately disingenuous. I'm quite confident you know all this but for anyone who doesn't, the Supreme Court unconstitutionally interfered in the elections process by mandating that states create safe black districts. It turned out to be a two-edged sword however, as the unintentional consequence was the creation of safe republican districts as well, since blacks vote purely along racial lines.
>>At the heart of that debate are majority-minority districts. A 1986 Supreme Court ruling,
Thornburg v. Gingles, established that where racially polarized voting
is present, it is illegal to dilute minority residents’ voting power, either intentionally or unintentionally. States across the South then drew new majority-minority districts to ensure that black voters could elect their candidates of choice. In many places, the newly drawn majority-minority districts elected those states’
first African-American congressional representatives since Reconstruction.
It was a win for African-American representation, and also a win for Republicans. By grouping together black voters, who vote overwhelmingly Democratic, the maps increased Republican electoral prospects in the surrounding districts. That dynamic has encouraged Republicans to advocate for majority-minority districts, while Democrats have been more skeptical of them.<<
https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...ay-to-make-sure-black-voters-are-represented/
