Critical reviews of social science research such as that presented in Colorblind Injustice typically take one of two approaches. The most popular approach evaluates the merits of the research and includes an appraisal of the logical coherence of the guiding theory or questions, the validity of the inferences made from the empirical observations, and the like.The second approach evaluates the policy implications of the research conclusions. Here I take the second rather than the first approach because I find Kousser’s research to be a masterful demonstration that racial motivations produced the electoral laws and redistricting efforts in Los Angeles,Memphis, Georgia, North Carolina, and Texas between the 1950s and 1990. Furthermore, Kousser shows how the development of Supreme Court doctrine concerning the use of racial criteria in redrawing electoral districts is logically flawed and a departure from legal precedents set in the 1950s and 1960s.The current trend toward a standard of colorblindness ignores the history of discrimination against blacks and Latinos and perpetuates racial injustice. Hence, the title of the book.