Supreme Court To Review Voting Rights Act of 1965

Critics suggest provisions of the law are outdated

The Supreme Court of the United States will review portions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Specifically, section 5 of the Act, which requires states and counties with a history of racial discrimination to seek federal permission to alter any election processes. It's widely considered to be the federal government's best weapon against racial discrimination.

The case is being brought forth by Shelby County, Alabama, which claims that federal reliance on 40-year-old voting data to determine modern discrimination practices is unconstitutional, and that state and local governments have made significant progress in voting rights since the law passed. The Act was last renewed in 2006.

Edward Blum, who directs Project on Fair Representation told the Associated Press that the federal government is operating in a "Jim Crow-era time warp."

Supporters of the Voting Rights Act point towards the Justice Department's recent attempts to block Voter ID laws on the grounds of racial discrimination as evidence that the law is still relevant.

Arguments for the case will likely be heard in early 2013 with a ruling issued by the end of June.

Via the Washington Times

Should these portions of the Voting Rights Act be struck down?

[MRMacrum]

Just another Right Wing assault on voting rights.

[CanisCanemEdit]

Interestingly, it would have been the Democrats who fought AGAINST voting rights for blacks in 1964.

"The bill came before the full Senate for debate on March 30, 1964 and the "Southern Bloc" of 18 southern Democratic Senators and one Republican Senator led by Richard Russell (D-GA) launched a filibuster to prevent its passage. Said Russell: "We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act...

[Zazziness]

@CanisCanemEdit True. But you'll find once LBJ supported the civil rights movement, the Dixie Democrats jumped ship. Where did they land and where did they stay? The Republic Party.

[MRMacrum]

@CanisCanemEdit - Absolutely. But they all switched sides when Ronnie ran and the South went over to the Dark side.

[CanisCanemEdit]

@Zazziness - LBJ long record of public hostility to civil rights.

His first speech in the Senate was an attack on Harry Truman’s proposed civil rights legislation that would have given black Americans protection against lynching and discrimination in employment.

It would also have made it easier for them to vote. In the speech Johnson argued that Truman’s proposals were a call “for depriving one minority (white people living in the Deep South) of its rights in order to extend rights to other minorities”.

Liberals in the Senate became angry with Johnson in 1957 over Eisenhower’s Civil Rights Bill.

They first of all complained about the weakness of the original bill. Then they turned on Johnson when he assigned the bill to the Judiciary Committee.

This was under the chairmanship of James Eastland, the most extreme racist in the Senate.

Joseph Rauh commented that it was now abundantly clear that Johnson was “running the Democratic party for the benefit of the Southern conservative viewpoint.”

This is why the civil rights activists were so upset when LBJ was selected as JFK's running mate.

The fact that LBJ was a racist is not only shown by his political record.

It is also supported by information from his friends who claim he was a nasty racist in private (apparently he called his black servants “ni@@ers” in front of people).

When LBJ signed the 1965 Civil Rights Act he made a prophecy that he was “signing away the south for 50 years”.

This proved accurate.

In fact, the Democrats have never recovered the vote of the white racists in the Deep South.

This is the electorate that now gives its support to the Republican Party.

A new alliance has therefore taken place between the white racists, right-wing conservatives and Christian fundamentalists.

[CanisCanemEdit]

Here are a couple of LBJ's public racist quotes:

“I’ll have those ni@@ers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”—Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One

“These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”—LBJ

You can find this in Ronald Kessler’s “Inside The White House”

[Faceman]

i say keep the law as it is.it works for most of the country except flordia which have no idea on hoe to count their votes

[bsking]

there is no racial discrimination in voting and hasn't been in a very long time. but it is a weapon the arsenal of the Democrat Party's "war on white peole".

the voter ID laws should be passed in all states. hell even the International observers were shocked that we did not require ID to vote in this country.
ID is required to get on welfare get food stamps get medical attention and cash a disability check.

[RobertJHarsh]

169% correct. But it floors me that a photo ID is not required to vote? Why? Try and get on a plane without a Photo ID and see how far that gets ya.

[MRMacrum]

Do you even know how contradictory your post is?

....."there is no racial discrimination in voting and hasn't been in a very long time.".....

And then right on it's heels....."but it is a weapon the arsenal of the Democrat Party's "war on white peole"."..........

[dances-weebles]

*shakes head*

[classychazy]

I live in Chillicothe, Ohio and I vote at our fire station that's in our village and if we want to vote we MUST show a valid I.D. or they will not let you vote. Why we have to do this when others don't, but when I called the election board I was told its their district its their call. However, I do believe you should have to show a valid I.D. to vote.

[RobertJHarsh]

@classychazy I am pretty sure in the bigger Ohio cities, not only was an ID not required, but it wasn't at the many polling places everyone voted at 5 or 6 times that day.

[martydotcom]

ARTICLE in today's Palm Beach Post. "GOP sought to reduce black vote" detailing changes in voting laws & non productive purges of voter lists comprised of black voters . The GOP "engineer" of this is now awaiting trial for a $200k theft for running phony party fund raising scams. He pocketed the money. Florida has proven inability to run and tabulate elections bring in the Feds

[martydotcom]

URL

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/state-...

[MRMacrum]

@martydotcom - Sounds like Greer was not just pilloried but crucified.

[martydotcom]

@MRMacrum one more article
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/nation...

[Zoe2012]

The entire system needs changed, utilize fingerprints, retinal scanning, or any other means to avoid continued voter fraud!

[Clbraz78]

Did I read that right? It outlaws a literacy test to be allowed to vote? If that's all it is then hell ya get rid of it. It has nothing to do with race in this day and age. I have thought for some time this needs to be done along with valid state photo I'd required.

[texas_cutie75]

You do have to be able to read to vote rhough, maybe modify the act.

[beachfront]

As seen from the 2012 election, the Voting Rights should stay in place. We now have 4 years until the next presidential election in which time we can establish a universal voting system across the states. Photo ID, early voting, ok, let's start working on that now so in 4 years, everyone will have ID and understand the voting process.

[tomincali]

what a mess. voter discrimination? are they talking about voter id? then a/a which is discrimination in all places it is practiced.

i didn't read anywhere about the armed thugs who was there only to intimidate.

cashing any gov check without id can get you in a jam.

[mimi57]

This makes no sense at all. Our president is black, this is not the 60's and everyone has the right to vote...once.

[jessejaymes]

All I can say is when is the last time you knew of a racist who admits to being a racist? Of course they say they're no reason to maintain the act. Well if there's no reason, it shouldn't be hampering anyone.

[ACTSmom]

Actually it does hamper the locals and states from making voting practice and procedure changes without permission of the feds. All that red tape is time consuming and costly.

[jessejaymes]

@ACTSmom Nonsense. Florida can't run a smooth election if you let them have all the say. Illinois is corrupt to the core. Indiana is corrupt. on and on and On. Not a single state should be exempt from this legislation.

[kyrebel]

If it works then don't mess with it. I think they should be more concerned with showing valid is before voting.

[Buggsy888]

This is to legally let illegals vote. I know sounds ridiculous,, but that is how we roll now. Voter suppression is a man made piece of crap propaganda item.

[ir0nw0lfe]

Strike the Voters Rights Act Down. It's irrelevant anyways if anyone can vote without a valid state photo id. beside dems claim there is no real voter fraud so there cant be any real voter discrimination either, right?

[Politicskid]

Yeah. They're not needed anymore.

[WattheTyler]

I swear America is getting more and more racist each day. Are we now gonna go back to the 1950s allowed states like Alabama and Mississippi to deny black people the right to vote. The right wing is going to far this time. If the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is struck down there will be a race riot beyond imagination.

[ConserveUSA]

Strike it down as soon as possible.