Conservatives on high court skeptical of continuing need for key part of voting rights law

Chicago Tribune ^ | 04/29/2009 | Mark Sherman

[BuckeyeTexan]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court's conservative justices led a sustained attack Wednesday on a key element of the Voting Rights Act, questioning whether one-time bastions of segregation still should be held to account for past discrimination.

The justices who were skeptical of that part of the voting rights law included Justice Anthony Kennedy, whose views are likely to prevail on the closely divided court. He tends to side with his more conservative colleagues on matters of race.

-snip-

The law requires all or parts of 16 states, mainly in the South, with a history of discrimination in voting to get approval in advance of making changes in the way elections are conducted. The idea behind it is to prevent discriminatory measures from being put in place.

-snip-

Kennedy acknowledged that the provision has been successful in rooting out discrimination in voting over the past 44 years. But times have changed, he said, questioning Congress' judgment in 2006 that it was needed for another 25 years.

-snip-

When Justice Department lawyer Neal Katyal pointed out that the high court has upheld previous extensions of the law, Justice Antonin Scalia dismissively replied, "A long time ago."

At another point, Chief Justice John Roberts asked, "At what point does that history ... stop justifying action with respect to some jurisdictions?"

[Repeal 16-17]

The Supreme Court's conservative justices led a sustained attack Wednesday on a key element of the Voting Rights Act, questioning whether one-time bastions of segregation still should be held to account for past discrimination.

For the Chicago Tribune, "conservative" means "racist". For anyone who doesn't immediately realize this, a reference to "segregation" was added.

[SunkenCiv]

The justices who were skeptical of that part of the voting rights law included Justice Anthony Kennedy, whose views are likely to prevail on the closely divided court. He tends to side with his more conservative colleagues on matters of race.

[dr_who]

While there is still a semi-conservative majority in the courts, expect the Obama administration to use whatever strongarm tactics that are required to get their way whenever their lawyers fail to make valid legal arguments for their positions. Enough of the “centrist” justices are easily cowed by the press as it is.