By Robert Sulzer
August 13, 2013
An important battle is going on between the U.S. Department of Justice, on behalf of voting rights for all citizens, and the several GOP controlled states trying to suppress the votes of minorities, young people and senior citizens – groups who tend to vote for Democrats.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled recently that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which determined those states that must receive clearance from the Justice Department or a federal court before they make changes to voting procedures, is unconstitutional. Section 5 of the Voting rights Act sets out this preclearance requirement and was extended by Congress in 2006 for 25 years—but without Section 4, Section 5 is insignificant.
Shortly after the Supreme court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, several states with Republican governors and Republican controlled state legislatures, such as Texas and North Carolina, pushed through draconian voter suppression laws, such as: requiring ID cards which are difficult for the elderly, minorities and poor people to acquire; reducing hours for early voting; restricting same day registration; and redistricting in a way to favor the election of GOP`ers.
Just two hours after the Supreme Court ruling, Texas began to advance a voter ID law and redistricting map which were blocked last year because of their discriminatory tendencies against Latinos and Blacks. North Carolina GOP`ers, feeling freed by the Supreme Court ruling on the Voting Rights Act, announced plans to push a voter ID law, eliminate early voting days and restrict same-day registration. Advocates of voting rights have alleged that voter ID laws and restrictions on early voting disproportionately hurt minorities, the elderly and college students who vote largely for Democrats.
Attorney General Eric Holder and the Justice Department have a new strategy. They are applying Section 3 of the Voting Rights Act, which the Supreme Court did not rule unconstitutional. Section 3 contains a “bail-in” process by which jurisdictions outside the formula of Section 4 that violate other provisions of the Voting Rights Act may be subject to preclearance under a federal court order. Eric Holder recently announced that the Justice department will ask a federal court in Texas to subject the State of Texas to preclearance requirements similar to those in Section 5 of the Act. His decision is based on the evidence of intentional racial discrimination that was presented last year in the redistricting case, Texas vs. Holder in addition to other examples of racial discrimination in Texas.
It is of utmost importance that Eric Holder is successful in his pursuit of voting justice in Texas. If he is successful, the Justice Department can continue its battle for voting fairness in other states which are practicing discrimination in the voting process. Not only Texas, but any state should be required to go through a preclearance process when changes to its voting laws reflect the potential for voter-related discrimination against minorities or the disadvantaged. We know that Governor Rick Scott and Florida`s GOP-controlled legislature will use the recent Supreme Court ruling to implement voter suppression laws and attempt to purge legal voters from the rolls, as they instituted in 2012. So we must be alert and on guard and do what we can to prevent that from happening.