Supreme Court Reaffirms Key Voting Rights Provision

by James Parks, Jun 22, 2009

In a narrow ruling today, the U.S. Supreme Court preserved a key component of the Voting Rights Act that requires certain states and localities with a history of voting discrimination to submit changes in voting procedures to the Department of Justice or a federal court before they can take effect. 

The 8-1ruling keeps in place one of the most important rules that fight voter discrimination. The surpisingly strong majority also deals a setback to conservative groups that have long sought to weaken federal voting rights laws. Clarence Thomas was the only justice to vote to void the voter protection provision. 

The High Court ruled that the Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 in Austin, Texas, can apply to opt out of the advance approval requirement, reversing a lower federal court that found it could not. But the court said the district must still meet the current requirements of the law. Click here to read the decision in the case.

Says Wade Henderson, president of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR):

In today’s near unanimous decision, the Supreme Court recognized the continuing relevance of the Voting Rights Act in its entirety and Congress’ role in protecting the right to vote for all Americans.

While the Voting Rights Act ended overt devices like poll taxes and literacy tests, it continues to serve as an important check against more disguised, but equally pernicious, forms of discrimination. Today’s decision reaffirms safeguards for minority voters in jurisdictions with a documented history of discrimination.

In 2006, Congress voted to extend Section 5 of the Civil Rights Act as part of the act’s overall reauthorization. Section 5 applies to all nine states—Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia—and to scores of counties and municipalities in other states that Congress found had a history of voter discrimination.

Civil rights lawyers say the Texas utility district was recruited by conservative legal groups and lawmakers to file suit soon after the Voting Acts Right was renewed. Those groups then championed the suit as it wound its way to the Supreme Court. The suit claimed that Section 5 is no longer necessary because voter discrimination is no longer a problem.

However, during the court’s April hearing, Debo Adegbile, director of litigation at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said voting discrimination is “persistent and adaptive” and continues to “manifest itself through repetitive efforts” such as moving polling stations from one place to another before an election, implementing redistricting plans to weaken minority voting strength and preventing students of color from voting.

While Congress was debating the act’s reauthorization in 2006, the LCCR and other civil rights groups submitted 14 reports documenting voting discrimination in the states covered by Section 5. Says Henderson:

Voter disenfranchisement, intimidation, and discrimination continue on today—a fact that Congress recognized in 2006 when they renewed the Voting Rights Act for another 25 years.

Print This Article | E-Mail This Article |Comments (0)