SCOTUS drops bomb: Section 4 of Voting Rights Act Unconstitutional

[ArcadiaGP]

Pre-clearance is unconstitutional, in regards to Section 4 (key part) of the Voting Rights Act

However, it's unclear right now if Section 5 is salvagable. Without coverage formula, there is no section 5.

Section 5 could still be used... if Congress passes something.

The odds that this Congress, or the next, will pass new legislation that would re-enable Section 5 is miniscule.

Overall, a victory. It's as though the SCOTUS is it's own branch of gov or something...

2013 is not 1960.

Edit: Al Sharpton says the Supreme Court decision is devastating, which means it's great news for America.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Bomb? Atomic, if not hydrogen.

 

[ViperJock]

Edit: Al Sharpton says the Supreme Court decision is devastating, which means it's great news for America.

 

[CathyInBlue]

All it means is this Congress and this President ramrods something through that gives lipservice to modern data and bada-bing-bada-boom it's all back in effect, and OH! Look. Now, the entire nation falls under its precepts and ALL voting law changes must pass through D.C.

 

[mrjarrell]

Is there a link to this story with some explanation of it?

 

[Rob377]

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-96_6k47.pdf

better than some hack journalist's confused paraphrase.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Is there a link to this story with some explanation of it?

Supreme Court strikes down key part of Voting Rights Act | Fox News


Essentially, you can't just say all southern states are racist based on data 50 years ago, now you have to prove it.

 

[lucky4034]

Yeah... this is over my head. I'll have to google this to figure out what the hell is going on.... Or maybe I'd be better off not knowing LOL

 

[ArcadiaGP]

SCOTUS simply struck down the 'formula' that was used. Congress is free to revise it, but there's nothing there.

Also, VRA challenges can still be made... but you must prove violation now, rather than jurisdiction proving innocence.

You must prove racism exists now whereas before it was based on 50yr old data.

 

[mrjarrell]

Well, as a Southerner and someone who's paid some attention to elections in the South, I can say that racism does still exist in the legislatures and bodies that regulate voting in the Southern states. We've seen more than a few cases of it the last few years and the courts threw out new voting laws that were passed that were geared specifically to disenfranchise minority voters. Congress had better act or there will be hell to pay on the ground at some future point, as the not so closeted racists in state legislatures across the South get their wish lists out and start passing new laws to disenfranchise minority voters.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Well, as a Southerner and someone who's paid some attention to elections in the South, I can say that racism does still exist in the legislatures and bodies that regulate voting in the Southern states. We've seen more than a few cases of it the last few years and the courts threw out new voting laws that were passed that were geared specifically to disenfranchise minority voters. Congress had better act or there will be hell to pay on the ground at some future point, as the not so closeted racists in state legislatures across the South get their wish lists out and start passing new laws to disenfranchise minority voters.

I highly doubt congress, or the enraged left, will want to do anything about this.

Reason: Racism has dwindled in the past 50 years. They want the formula to match 1965, not 2013. It would only hurt their argument about how prevalent and awful and racist everyone is.

They deeply hurt their case by pretending there hasn't been great progress on race. It's always the '60s to them.

We'll see what happens, but that's my guess.

 

[funeralweb]

The POTUS doesn't like it, either. Good enough for me.

Obama Voting Rights Act: President Reacts To Supreme Court Decision

 

[rambone]

For better or worse, the states should be in control of their own elections. The Feds don't deserve that kind of power over the states. The suffrage movement should have occurred at the state level.

 

[MisterChester]

For better or worse, the states should be in control of their own elections. The Feds don't deserve that kind of power over the states. The suffrage movement should have occurred at the state level.

I have to disagree with you there. How would it be fair if women and minorities can't vote in a state and can in others? That's so unconstitutional.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

The Feds don't deserve that kind of power over the states.

I think we deserve that kind of power over the South. We paid for it.

Plus there is that whole text of the Constitution and the 14th Amendment thing.

Anywho I am not surprised that the Court thinks that the scarlet R cannot be branded on the South forever.

 

[avboiler11]

Progressives tell us all the time that "the world has changed". They tell us that about gay marriage, gun control, economic inequality, climate change, ad infinitum.

But when folks use the exact same phrase when referring to voting legislation that in 2013 treats southern states like they're still in the Jim Crow era, all you get is a bunch of race baiting nonsense.

As somebody who spends a high percentage of my work time in the deep south, yes, there are still racists down there.

But there are racists everywhere in this country. And those racists aren't always of Caucasian ethnicity.

Disenfranchsing any voters is bad, even if those voters support something or someone that I do not. But IMO, so is Uncle Sam assuming any and every change to voting procedures in certain places of this country are driven by racial bias.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Also, if you want an idea to see how far we've come in racial relations, search Twitter for Clarence Thomas and "Uncle Tom".

Flooded with death threats/wishes, and racist remarks. So, maybe not... the left is still as racist as ever.


Edit: Haha, Democrat State Legislator in Minnesota called Clarence Thomas an "Uncle Tom" just now on Twitter.

 

[rambone]

I have to disagree with you there. How would it be fair if women and minorities can't vote in a state and can in others?

How would it be fair if Washington D.C. was making oppressive rules across all the states? (This has become standard operating procedure today)

If there's an injustice to fix, I'd rather see it corrected by the state. Washington D.C. is too unwieldy, too hard to control, too overreaching. If Congress reacts to public demands at all, they produce a thousand-page monstrosity which most often causes more problems than it was ever supposed to fix.

I think we deserve that kind of power over the South. We paid for it.

Hows all that Federal control working out for you? You ever notice that all that power affects every state on just about every issue?

 

[hornadylnl]

Hows all that Federal control working out for you? You ever notice that all that power affects every state on just about every issue?

I think the feds should take over all local code enforcement. Imagine the harmony when we have federally regulated grass heights.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Hows all that Federal control working out for you? You ever notice that all that power affects every state on just about every issue?

Fairly well. The South is behaving itself now.

Oh, sure, there have been some schoolhouse door incidents, murders and voter intimdation but by the large they are behaving themselves now.

"That power" is a legitimate exercise of federal power over the states pursuant to the Constitution which guarantees a republican form of government to the states and the civil rights of the residents of the states.

Ensuring that the South behaves is legitimate federal power. The 100s of other things that we can both complain about . . . not so much.