Voting rights ordinance goes before Supreme Court

One of the key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 may be abolished if the recent hearings at the United States Supreme Court are any indication of how the justices will vote on case No. 08-322.

Renewed in 2006 for another 25 years by Congress, the Voting Rights Act was created to prevent disenfranchisement of minority voters. The current controversy is over Section 5 of the act, which stipulates that certain states and districts must gain the federal government's permission to change voting procedures.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, who many think represents the swing vote in this case, responded to this by saying, "No one questions the validity, the urgency, the essentiality of the Voting Rights Act. The question is whether or not it should be continued with this differentiation between the states. And that is for Congress to show." Section 5 applies mostly to Southern states, and is based on registration data that was current during the institution of the legislation. Kennedy added that this provision has recognized some states as being less sovereign than others.

Many in favor of abolishing the "pre-clearance" section of the legislation have said that it is not fair that the provision applies only to certain locations instead of the entire country. Similarly, some of those living in districts affected by the legislation have expressed frustration with the seeming assumption that they are racist because of where they live. The election of Barack Obama as president last November has also been an argument made by those who see the provision as outdated.

Those opposed to striking down Section 5 have argued that it is a landmark piece of legislation which is still needed to prevent discrimination against racial and ethnic minority groups. Gerrymandering and fewer elected minorities are among the concerns of those who wish to see Section 5 stay in place. Mississippi, a state covered by Section 5, has the most elected black officials in the United States, a fact that many think was made possible by the provision.

After attending the Supreme Court hearing last Wednesday, Representative John Lewis of Georgia, a leader of the civil rights movement, said, "It reminded me of some of the same debate of 1965. This act is one of the most progressive pieces of legislation the country ever passed, and it changed America forever. We don't need to go back."

If the Supreme Court overturns Section 5, Congress will be allowed to re-examine which districts must ask federal permission before changing voting laws. But instituting this may not be a viable option in districts that historically have not had to deal with the expensive process of getting the okay from federal authorities on their election laws.

The case being heard originated in Texas. It was brought by the Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One against Attorney General Eric Holder. A group of suburban Texas citizens had to vote in a private garage, and wanted their utility board's elections moved to a school, but federal permission had to be granted for that to happen.