Skip to comments.Supreme Court strikes down part of Voting Rights Act
Posted on 06/25/2013 7:40:20 AM PDT by NotYourAverageDhimmi
The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a civil rights law that requires some states to get federal permission to change their voting rules, but it struck down the formula for which jurisdictions are covered leaving it to Congress to redraw the map.
The opinion was written by Chief Justice John Roberts. The vote was 5-4.
Our country has changed, and while any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions, Roberts wrote for the court.
Under the law, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, nine mostly Southern states must get permission from the Justice Department or a special panel of three federal judges before they make changes. The rule also applies to 12 cities and 57 counties elsewhere.
The act is considered the most important piece of civil rights legislation ever passed. Congress has renewed it four times, most recently in 2006, with overwhelming margins in both houses.
But the law still uses election data from 1972 to determine which states, cities and counties are covered. Some jurisdictions complain that they are being punished for the sins of many decades ago.
Legal observers have said that striking down the map would mean sending the issue back to a deeply divided Congress, and they said it was an open question whether Congress could even agree on a new coverage map.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote a dissenting opinion and was joined by three other members of the courts more liberal wing.
If the communists on the court were against this, maybe it’s not half bad.
For instance: documented instances of voter intimidation. We know of one in Philadelphia. Wouldn't that be ironic?
Great. So our partisan Congress is given the power to determine which states should be exposed to additional voter fraud. There’s no way they would ever abuse that power in order to rig elections.
But not good enough.
Reconstruction was allowed to live.
Sure, it could work in our favor now, because we control the house. Do you think that formula will remain the same if Dems get a hold of both chambers though?
This could be like the redistricting, giving whichever party is currently in power an undue influence on upcoming elections.
Sounds to me like the Court has just made the Voting Rights Act a dead letter. Since the Congress will never agree on how to redo the map, it will just sit in a corner and gather dust like a buggy whip.
He says they are going to mobilize and MARCH and demand congressional action,
good luck with the house Al , I am sure the GOP senators will sellout again though.
This is good and about time.
Basically, this put it on a death watch - any vote for keeping a state on this is effectively labeling the state as a bunch of bigots - who is going to vote for that?
What do you mean? The pathetic House will bend over and not even ask for lube.
They've had it for decades.
this was a current “political roadblock” where congress is incapable of rescinding a law whose time had past. Remember Holder ALONE was required to approve or not approve any change.
Now he no longer has real standing to oppose anti-fraud measures. (like one county one vote in presidential electoral awards; voter ID)
Of course this does not bode well for marriage because the pro-homosexual wing on the USSC. They firmly believe the born that way myth.
I see this as nothing but a loss. The only reason Demoncrats are upset is that they think they lost just a little ground.
That seems to be the trend on the Court. Tell the other branches (and by extension the voting public) that they need to live with and deal with the messes they create.
It was also the underlying rationale for Roberts’ (wrongheaded) ObamaCare ruling.
A 5-4 victory in the highest court in the nation is NO victory for the owners of this country, us.
Boy another 5-4 indecision. No honest person can tell me this is based on the constitution which is the ONLY criteria the USSC should be using.
5-4, 5-4, 5-4 ,5-4... = political hacks, political hacks, political hacks, political hacks...
What trash we have sitting on OUR USSC. Brilliant minds? Hell no. Political hacks is all they are and easily blackmailed to boot.
If the best and brightest legal minds in the country (we were told they were right?) cannot agree on what a small document like the US Constitution says how on earth can they interpret the multi-thousand page laws crafted by community organizing groups then passed by our unconstitutional ruling elite?
We live in a country ruled by By Washington elites, For Washington elites all the while the US Constitution forbids this kind of ruling elite. An once again, another day, we do nothing.
There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth .............
What is NBC saying here... as opposed to what? the less liberal wing?
No member of Congress has the balls to stand up and point out that racial voter intimidation these days is far more black-on-white than it is white-on-black.
I don’t think the Dems are upset about this at all. It’s going to be a great mobilizing issue for them going into 2014. Their base will believe itwhen told that this ruling overturned the voting rights act when it does nothing of the sort (preserving preclearance, just sayng that a 50+ year old formula can no longer be used)
I predict that it will instead be replaced with some sort of criteria. Although there will certainly be a lot of maneuvering to determine that criteria, it will give any voting jurisdictions that are affected a way to escape it by complying.
However, I expect it would also result in a lot of frivolous legal action to declare a jurisdiction NOT in compliance, like the American Disability Act has been misused.