Changes

== The Voting Rights Act of 1965 ==

== The Voting Rights Act of 1965 ==

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 racial 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 prohibits changes to election laws in covered states that "[have] the purpose [or] will have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color."<ref>The citation in the "United States Code" is 42 U.S.C. 1973c(a).</ref>

The U.S. Constitution does not establish a right to vote by anyone.  For our entire Nation's history the laws concerning elections have been established by each State for its own residences, with a few limitations in amendments to the U.S. Constitution (the 15th Amendment prohibits racial discrimination in voting laws, and the 19th Amendment prohibits gender discrimination).

The basis for the law and where it applies is this:  if there is any 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 by an overwhelmingly Democrat-controlled Congress and president in order to exert greater federal control over the election process, and was subsequently applied against States (like Alaska) that had a history of discrimination against other minority groups (like American Indians and Hispanics).  Congress declared the purpose of its pre-clearance provision to shift the burden to States: {{cquote|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. 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 basis for the Voting Rights Act and where it applies is this:  if there is any 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 by an overwhelmingly Democrat-controlled Congress and president in order to exert greater federal control over the election process, and was subsequently applied against States (like Alaska) that had a history of discrimination against other minority groups (like American Indians and Hispanics).  Congress declared the purpose of its pre-clearance provision to shift the burden to States: {{cquote|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. 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.}}

''South Carolina v. Katzenbach'', 383 U.S. 301, 328 (1966) (citation omitted).

''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, not merely Spanish, or else the Voting Rights Act could be applied against the state or local government.

You might be surprised by 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 congressional reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act, Democrats rewrote the criteria for coverage under its Section 4 so that it would include Texas.  Indeed, ballots now must be printed at enormous local expense in numerous foreign languages, not merely Spanish, or else the Voting Rights Act could be applied against all future elections by the State or local government.

The Voting Rights Act requires "pre-clearance" by the U.S. Department of Justice for any changes in election law by a state or local government that is covered by the Act.  When South Carolina passed its voter ID law, the Voting Rights Act gave the Obama Administration the power to delay and object to the law, because South Carolina is covered by the Voting Rights Act.  Even though there is nothing overtly racial about South Carolina's voter ID law,<ref>Some opponents of voter ID laws try to compare them to Jim Crow era laws that sought to limit voting by blacks.  Jim Crow era laws were written in a neutral manner but had the effect of preventing blacks from voting.</ref> the Voting Rights Act has been used to force states to ensure that changes to voting procedures do not have discriminatory purpose or effect.  In fact, after the pre-clearance process, South Carolina's voter ID law (as modified during the pre-clearance process) is now in effect.

The Voting Rights Act requires "pre-clearance" by the U.S. Department of Justice for any changes in election law by a State or local government that is covered by the Act.  When South Carolina passed its voter ID law, the Voting Rights Act gave the Obama Administration the power to delay and object to the law, because South Carolina is covered by the Voting Rights Act.  Even though there is nothing overtly racial about South Carolina's voter ID law,<ref>Some opponents of voter ID laws try to compare them to Jim Crow-era laws that sought to limit voting by blacks.  Jim Crow-era laws were written in a neutral manner but had the effect of preventing blacks from voting.</ref> the Voting Rights Act has been used to force States to ensure that changes to voting procedures do not have discriminatory purpose or effect.  Due to the pre-clearance process required by the Act, South Carolina had to modify its voter ID law before it could become effective.

Florida attempted to trim back its early voting period for the last election, but the Obama Administration used the Voting Rights Act to object to that.  The Voting Rights Act gives the federal government extraordinary powers to grant or deny "pre-clearance" necessary for any covered jurisdiction to make changes to its election laws.

Florida attempted to trim back its early voting period for the last election, but the Obama Administration used the Voting Rights Act to object to that.  The Voting Rights Act gives the federal government extraordinary powers to grant or deny "pre-clearance" necessary for any covered jurisdiction to make changes to its election laws.

The following regions of the Nation are subject to the Voting Rights Act (note that New Jersey is not subject to it).  These are known as "Section 5 Covered Jurisdictions":<ref>"Section 5" refers to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.  The federal government can add or subtract jurisdictions simply by issuing a federal regulation, without Congress actually approving the addition of a new State or county to the list.</ref>

The following regions of the Nation are subject to the Voting Rights Act (note that New Jersey is not subject to it).  These are known as "Section 5 Covered Jurisdictions":<ref>"Section 5" refers to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.  The federal government can add or subtract jurisdictions simply by issuing a federal regulation, without additional congressional approval.</ref>

===Entire States that are Covered===

===Entire States that are Covered===

*South Dakota (counties)

*South Dakota (counties)

The U.S. Supreme Court has taken a big case from Alabama that challenges the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act, and by June 2013 is expected to render a decision that may trim back the scope or influence of this law.

The U.S. Supreme Court has recently taken a big case in which a county in Alabama challenges the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act, and by June 2013 the Court is expected to render a decision that may trim back the scope or influence of this law.

== Busing ==

== Busing ==