Supreme Court’s decision....is a constitutional train wreck of historic proportions

[marmar]

from truthdig:


Gutting the Voting Rights Act

Posted on Jun 25, 2013
By Bill Blum


No matter how you parse it, the Supreme Court’s decision Tuesday in Shelby County v. Holder, which gutted the Voting Rights Act, is a constitutional train wreck of historic proportions. But unlike most such disasters, this is one we saw coming.

In 2009, in an otherwise obscure case involving a Texas utility district with an elected board of directors (Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder) that was brought to the court by the same group of right-wing activists that engineered the Shelby County case, Chief Justice John Roberts’ majority opinion questioned the continued validity of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. That section requires states and localities with a legacy of electoral discrimination to obtain “preclearance” from the Justice Department or the courts before implementing new voting laws and procedures. Currently, nine states—mostly in the Deep South, along with a smattering of counties and cities elsewhere—are covered by Section 5.

In Tuesday’s fractious 5-4 Shelby County opinion, also authored by Roberts, the court left Section 5 standing but declared Section 4 of the act unconstitutional, which sets forth the formula for determining which jurisdictions across the country are subject to preclearance requirements. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg reasoned in an impassioned dissent joined by the court’s liberals, without the Section 4 formula, Section 5, along with all its vital safeguards, is effectively “immobilized.”

At the heart of the Roberts opinion is the view that racism in America is a thing of the past. When the Voting Rights Act was enacted in 1965, Roberts wrote, “the States could be divided into two groups: those with a recent history of voting tests and low voter registration and turnout, and those without those characteristics. Congress based its coverage formula on that distinction. Today the nation is no longer divided along those lines, yet the Voting Rights Act continues to treat it as if it were.” .........................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/gutting_the_voting_rights_act_20130625/

[Scootaloo]

1. Oh good, a privileged white man has announced the death of Racism.

Finally! What took this guy so long?

[Cary]

2. We see it all coming and this is why Democrats must vote

Elections have consequences. If we vote, we win.

Do you want circular firing squads or do you want Supreme Court Justices like Roberts, Alito, Scalia and Thomas?

[great white snark]

3. And still some DUers continue to proclaim that "majorities in congress don't matter."

It f@%king matters.

[xchrom]

4. du rec.

[madrchsod]

5. white man`s privilege

we know best for those who are not like us.

[SoCalDem]

6. In 2009, we were warned.

and even though there are two new justices, (one of whom loves to recuse herself, even though the conservatives on the court would NEVER do that), was there ever really any doubt that racial issues decided by this court would always be dangerous territory for us?

In 2009, SCOTUS told congress to "fix it".. we had the majority until Jan 2011, and we did not "fix it".

The preclearance areas should have been ADDED TO, and a clarification as to WHY...and there should have been an addition of NATIONAL VOTING STANDARDS whenever there is a DC position involved. (senate/president,/congressperson)..

Election day should have been deemed a holiday, and early voting length of time and polling places/number of voting machines per population/hours of voting.. all should have been standardized for fair treatment..

and yes.. a NATIONAL Voter ID card should have been issued for FREE to anyone who is a registered voter or who has previously voted.

Repub;icans are experts at "taking over" a democratic position, and they have strategically placed judges who will happily take their bullshit cases where THEY claim to be victims of racism..

We have to beat them at their own game by thinking a few steps ahead of them..and out of the box.. to ever beat them.

When we have a majority in both houses and the presidency we have to be bold..

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. Yes, yes they did

It's in the decision.

[Solly Mack]

7. K&R

[intheflow]

8. This will go down as our generation's Dred Scott decision.

It will be overturned eventually, but too many years hence, and at such a high cost to human dignity.

[kickysnana]

9. There is a slight chance to make lemonade here. Actual disenfranchisement has grown.

Somebody suggested a Constitutional Amendment to make sure that this is stopped. The cost of having to keep fighting the same battle over and over while the 1% are busy picking our pockets is too high. Wisconsin, Michigan and Ohio are just as bad as the original miscreant states.

And to do that we need to put boots on the ground and got out and make sure people go vote in every election AND that they understand what is at stake.

[Ms. Toad]

10. Take a look at what he actually said,

When the Voting Rights Act was enacted in 1965, Roberts wrote, “the States could be divided into two groups: those with a recent history of voting tests and low voter registration and turnout, and those without those characteristics. Congress based its coverage formula on that distinction. Today the nation is no longer divided along those lines, yet the Voting Rights Act continues to treat it as if it were.”

And the special enforcement provisions in Section 5 were left intact.

This decision can just as easily be read as racism is alive and well, but not just in the south - it doesn't say racial discrimination is a thing of the past. It says the lines are not the same as they once were, and it is unconstitutional to pretend they are.

I don't know how he/they intended the decision - but I would love to have Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act applied to Pennsylvania, for example, with its aggressive attempts at voter suppression by strict voter ID, which fell most heavily on minority communities. That provision didn't apply to Pennsylvania, and Pennsylvania was free to enact Voter ID laws that were delayed in implementation, but are back in play now. At the same time similar provisions were blocked in the south.

Despite the bemoaning going on, I see this as an opportunity to have the provisions of the VRA apply not just to the south - but other states as they demonstrate their intent to suppress voting rights in a way that disparately impacts minorities.

(And, yeah, I have my flame retardant jammies on.)

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. You read it too

The formula needs to change. (With this congress, no, not really)

Short term it will be painful, but the damn formula needs to change. It still used things like literary tests as well, which were banned for 40 years.

[Ms. Toad]

14. Interpretations of what court opinions said

are rarely anywhere near what they actually said.

And while I don't like the coalition in the majority, and I certainly suspect the motives of most of them, I really can't argue with the reasoning. And I can see the possibility that this could be used to subject more of the states which are currently passing laws which are almost certainly directed toward suppressing minority vote to provisions which have been used to great success already in the south.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. You know what worries me?

It's gutted!!! The Republican congress needs to do nothing. Though Sensenbrenner went there today, we need to come up with a new formula. With everything else it got lost

[Ms. Toad]

18. That concerns me as well.

But it passed overwhelmingly the last time it was up for a vote, so perhaps what seems like a very strong desire not to be perceived as a racist (even stronger among Republicans who know they have an achilles heel there) will motivate the passage of a new section IV.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Good point

[roamer65]

12. Here's the solution, subject ALL to the old rules of the VRA that were struck down.

That instantaneously makes it equal and constitutional.

Make some changes to make it more modern probably.

[Kurovski]

16. Kick (NT)

[Starry Messenger]

17. k&r