The recent Supreme Court decision that invalidated a portion of the Voting Rights Act was a major blow to the democratic ideal of equal access to the ballot box for every American citizen. The Court claimed that the Act which passed in 1965, employed forty year old data that did not take into account the racial progress that had occurred and the way American society had evolved. In a 5-4 ruling, the Court stated that a key provision of the 1965 Act could not be enforced without Congress re-determining which states and municipalities needed close federal oversight of their elections.
Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act mandated that jurisdictions that had a history of previously violating civil rights required prior federal approval to change their voting laws or procedures. Most of these jurisdictions, not surprisingly, were in the South. Chief Justice John Roberts in the majority opinion noted- “Congress did not use the record it compiled to shape a coverage formula grounded in current conditions. It instead re-enacted a formula based on 40-year-old facts having no relationship to the present day.”
For Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to be put into force again, Congress would have to enact legislation that established a new formula. The chance of this happening in the Republican controlled House is about the same as a snowball lasting in Hell. Thus, the Supreme Court
essentially emasculated the Voting Rights Act for the foreseeable future. The Court also overlooked the fact that voting by minorities had improved because of the Voting Rights Act umbrella that had been provided. This shielded them from abusive state legislatures that would have been happy to restrict minority voting.
The validity of this last argument is shown by the number of Southern states that within days of the Court’s ruling, rushed to pass or implement new laws that would impact minority voters and keep many of them from the polls (http://goo.gl/ypf7N). Texas declared almost immediately that it would enforce a strict photo ID provision for voters. This law had previously been nullified by a lower federal court before the Supreme Court decision. Mississippi and Alabama also said that they would proceed to enforce their own voter identification laws that had previously been waiting
for federal approval which was no longer needed. North Carolina is also moving to pass new voter ID laws.
The commonality of all these states is that they are Southern with Republican held governorships and Republican controlled legislatures, all with a previous history of civil rights violations and attempts to restrict minority voting. These new state voting laws use various mechanisms to limit minority voting in the name of reducing voter fraud, which has never been shown to be a problem.
The photo ID provision is the most onerous for minorities and the poor, since many of these people do not have drivers’ licenses or other accepted methods of identification. Photo IDs may be necessary to register to vote and also be required at the polls. Obtaining these photo IDs may be time consuming and costly, discouraging minority voters from getting them in order to vote.
Cutting back on the number of early voting days and voting hours by closing the polls early, also disproportionately affects working minority voters, who do not have time to stand in line for hours to wait to vote. Limiting the number of polling places, or placing them in areas that are inconvenient for minority voters are other ways to make it less likely they will vote. Numerous suits can be expected in the future to try and overturn the laws that limit minority voting, but the chances for success after the Supreme Court ruling are probably minimal.
Gerrymandering during the redistricting process is another mechanism utilized to dilute the
power of minorities. Unfortunately, this is within the purview of the state legislatures unless it has been delegated to an Independent Redistricting Commission, though the results can be challenged in the courts.
The majority on the “activist” Supreme Court knew what they were doing when they overturned Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act which had previously been enacted by Congress. It was a blatantly political move to help Republican conservatives by allowing states to make it more difficult for minorities to vote. Over time, demographics will wrest control of many Southern
state legislatures from the Republicans and the voter ID laws will be made more voter friendly. Until this happens, the voting power of minorities will not be commensurate with their numbers, tarnishing American democracy. Well, at least no poll taxes have so far been instituted.
Resurrecting Democracy
www.robertalevinebooks.com
Political junkie, Vietnam vet, neurologist- three books on aging and dementia. Book on health care reform in 2009- Shock Therapy for the American Health Care System. Book on the need for a centrist third party- Resurrecting Democracy- A Citizen’s Call for a Centrist Third Party published in 2011. Aging Wisely, published in August 2014 by Rowman and Littlefield. Latest book- The Uninformed Voter published May 2020