Kant's Deontology

Immanuel Kant, in his 1785 book Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, describes a deontologist view of morals. He argues that a good will is the only thing that is inherently good. This means that all good actions must be the result of a good will.

He stresses this point by discussing maxims for living one’s life. Any maxim that is good to follow, Kant argues, must be good universally. If it were to be made into a universal law, it must not contradict itself.

This leads to the concept of the categorical imperative. This concept describes actions that are absolutely necessary without consideration to a specific end. Kant believes in the dignity of the individual, so one may have a duty to protect that dignity, even if such action will not succeed in achieving this goal. In other words, it is imperative that one completes the action, whether or not the action will lead to a desired result.

One of the best examples of applying this to redistricting would be the Voting Rights Act (VRA). Section 2 of this act creates a requirement for minority protection in redistricting (by creating majority-minority districts). These days, however, this can lead to a problem for minorities. Voters of a certain race can be packed together into one district in such a way that they have a reduced voice in government. Creating districts that are dominated by one racial group gives that group lots of political power in just a few districts, when they could have instead maintained significant influence in many districts.

Kant would not allow this problem to get in the way of legislation like the VRA. Despite creating a loophole that reduces minority representation, and thereby opposing its own intended purpose, the VRA would be necessary. Passing such legislation would be a categorical imperative.