Changes

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is one of the most important and burdensome of all federal laws.  Enacted pursuant to the 15th Amendment (which prohibits discrimination in voting laws), the Voting Rights Act requires pre-clearance by the U.S. Department of Justice of any changes in election laws by certain states and local government.  Most of the States covered by the Voting Rights Act are in the South (including Florida and Texas), while some of the counties are located in unexpected places around the Nation (including New York).

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is one of the most important and burdensome of all federal laws.  Enacted pursuant to the 15th Amendment (which prohibits discrimination in voting laws), the Voting Rights Act requires pre-clearance by the U.S. Department of Justice of any changes in election laws by certain states and local government.  Most of the States covered by the Voting Rights Act are in the South (including Florida and Texas), while some of the counties are located in unexpected places around the Nation (including New York).

The basis for the law and where it applies is this:  if there is an evidence of racial discrimination in how elections are run by a State or local government, then it can be designated as subject to the Voting Rights Act for future elections.

The basis for the law and where it applies is this:  if there is an evidence of racial discrimination in how elections are run by a State or local government, then it can be designated as subject to the Voting Rights Act for future elections.  The Act was enacted over a backdrop of Southern states coming up with creative ways to prevent blacks from voting faster than they could be ruled unconstitutional.  The intent of the pre-clearance provision was to shift the burden to states: "Congress had found that case-by-case litigation was inadequate to combat widespread and persistent discrimination in voting, because of the inordinate amount of time and energy required to overcome the obstructionist tactics invariably encountered in these lawsuits.[34] After enduring nearly a century of systematic resistance to the Fifteenth Amendment, Congress might well decide to shift the advantage of time and inertia from the perpetrators of the evil to its victims. The question remains, of course, whether the specific remedies prescribed in the Act were an appropriate means of combatting the evil, and to this question we shall presently address ourselves."  ''South Carolina v. Katzenbach'', 383 U.S. 301, 328 (1966) (citation omitted).

You might be surprised what is considered to be racial discrimination that triggers application of the Voting Rights Act for all future elections.  In Texas, officials did not print a Spanish version of the ballot in one election, and in a 1975 reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act, the criteria for coverage under Section 4 were written to include Texas based upon this action.  Indeed, ballots now have to be printed at enormous local expense in numerous foreign languages, or else the Voting Rights Act could be applied against the state or local government.

You might be surprised what is considered to be racial discrimination that triggers application of the Voting Rights Act for all future elections.  In Texas, officials did not print a Spanish version of the ballot in one election, and in a 1975 reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act, the criteria for coverage under Section 4 were written to include Texas based upon this action.  Indeed, ballots now have to be printed at enormous local expense in numerous foreign languages, or else the Voting Rights Act could be applied against the state or local government.