Voting Rights Act of 1965 - Revision history

RobSmith: Reverted edits by DanielAPulido (talk) to last revision by RobSmith

2020-09-12T13:40:09Z

Reverted edits by DanielAPulido (talk) to last revision by RobSmith

DanielAPulido at 11:47, September 12, 2020

2020-09-12T11:47:07Z

RobSmith: RobSmith moved page Voting Rights Act to Voting Rights Act of 1965 over redirect

2019-02-15T08:17:00Z

RobSmith moved page Voting Rights Act to Voting Rights Act of 1965 over redirect

RobSmith: /* Voting Rights Act voting results */

2019-02-15T08:15:12Z

‎Voting Rights Act voting results

RobSmith: /* History */

2019-02-15T08:14:05Z

‎History

DavidB4: category

2016-07-29T20:15:08Z

DavidB4-bot: clean up & uniformity

2016-07-13T21:29:24Z

clean up & uniformity

Wschact: /* Private cause of action */ fix cite

2015-02-09T03:15:27Z

‎Private cause of action: fix cite

Wschact: Private cause of action

2015-02-09T03:14:34Z

Private cause of action

GregG: rephrase

2014-10-26T18:40:34Z

rephrase

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:40, September 12, 2020
Line 57:		Line 57:
	[[Category:Civil Rights]]		[[Category:Civil Rights]]
	[[Category:United States Election Law]]		[[Category:United States Election Law]]
−	~~[[Category:Laws That Promote Racism]]~~

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:47, September 12, 2020
Line 57:		Line 57:
	[[Category:Civil Rights]]		[[Category:Civil Rights]]
	[[Category:United States Election Law]]		[[Category:United States Election Law]]
		+	[[Category:Laws That Promote Racism]]

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 The final Senate vote on August 4 was 49 Democrats and 30 Republicans in favor, one Republican and 17 Democrats opposed. [[Segregation]]ists who voted against the Voting Rights Act were [[J. William Fulbright]],<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,871879,00.html?iid=chix-sphere Picking the Team], ''TIME Magazine'', December 12, 1960.</ref> awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by [[Bill Clinton]], and Al Gore, Sr., father of Democratic Presidential Nominee [[Al Gore]].
-==Voting Rights Act voting results==
+==Voting Rights Act results by party==
-By party:
-−
 The two numbers in each line of this list refer to the number of representatives voting in favor and against the act, respectively.

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:14, February 15, 2019
Line 13:		Line 13:

	The final Senate vote on August 4 was 49 Democrats and 30 Republicans in favor, one Republican and 17 Democrats opposed. [[Segregation]]ists who voted against the Voting Rights Act were [[J. William Fulbright]],<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,871879,00.html?iid=chix-sphere Picking the Team], ''TIME Magazine'', December 12, 1960.</ref> awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by [[Bill Clinton]], and Al Gore, Sr., father of Democratic Presidential Nominee [[Al Gore]].		The final Senate vote on August 4 was 49 Democrats and 30 Republicans in favor, one Republican and 17 Democrats opposed. [[Segregation]]ists who voted against the Voting Rights Act were [[J. William Fulbright]],<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,871879,00.html?iid=chix-sphere Picking the Team], ''TIME Magazine'', December 12, 1960.</ref> awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by [[Bill Clinton]], and Al Gore, Sr., father of Democratic Presidential Nominee [[Al Gore]].
		+
		+	==Voting Rights Act voting results==
		+	By party:
		+
		+	The two numbers in each line of this list refer to the number of representatives voting in favor and against the act, respectively.
		+
		+	Senate: 77–19
		+
		+	Democrats: 47–17 (73%-27%)
		+
		+	Republicans: 30–2 (94%-6%)
		+
		+	House: 333–85
		+
		+	Democrats: 221–61 (78%-22%)
		+
		+	Republicans: 112–24 (82%-18%)

	==Clinton era violations of the Voting Rights Act==		==Clinton era violations of the Voting Rights Act==

@@ Line 41: / Line 41: @@
 [[Category:United States Law]]
 [[Category:Civil Rights]]
-[[Category:United States election law]]
+[[Category:United States Election Law]]

← Older revision	Revision as of 08:17, February 15, 2019
(No difference)

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 Under Johnson, the Senate had not been able to muster enough votes to cut off a filibuster on a Civil Rights Bill. With Republican support, the final count showed 44 Democrats and 27 Republicans voting to end the filibuster, with 23 Democrats and only 6 Republicans opposed. The formal Senate vote on the bill took place on June 19, 1964. It passed overwhelmingly, 73-27.
-The final Senate vote on August 4 was 49 Democrats and 30 Republicans in favor, one Republican and 17 Democrats opposed. [[Segregation]]ists who voted against the Voting Rights Act were [[J. William Fulbright]] <ref>[http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,871879,00.html?iid=chix-sphere Picking the Team], ''TIME Magazine'', December 12, 1960.</ref>, awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by [[Bill Clinton]], and Al Gore, Sr., father of Democratic Presidential Nominee [[Al Gore]].
+The final Senate vote on August 4 was 49 Democrats and 30 Republicans in favor, one Republican and 17 Democrats opposed. [[Segregation]]ists who voted against the Voting Rights Act were [[J. William Fulbright]],<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,871879,00.html?iid=chix-sphere Picking the Team], ''TIME Magazine'', December 12, 1960.</ref> awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by [[Bill Clinton]], and Al Gore, Sr., father of Democratic Presidential Nominee [[Al Gore]].
 ==Clinton era violations of the Voting Rights Act==
@@ Line 40: / Line 40: @@
 [[Category:United States Law]]
-[[category:Civil Rights]]
+[[Category:Civil Rights]]
 [[Category:United States election law]]

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 In recent years it has enabled liberals in [[Washington, D.C.]] to block reforms such as voter ID sought by local jurisdictions in 16 states.  However, it should be noted that Georgia's voter ID law was precleared and that a three-judge panel allowed South Carolina's voter ID law to take effect (albeit modified by a state interpretation during the trial).<ref>''South Carolina v. United States'' (D.D.C. 2012)</ref>  The entire State of Texas was subjected to ongoing federal control of its elections until it successfully bails out of being a covered jurisdiction in part because Texas once printed its ballots in English rather than Spanish.  Texas has also had more objections to changes in its voting procedures from 1966 to 2004 than any other covered state.<ref>''Northwest Austin Mun. Utility Dist. No. One v. Mukasey'' 573 F.Supp.2d. 221, 281 (D.D.C. 2008)</ref>
 ==Private cause of action==
-Citizens can file civil suits under the Voting Rights Act. On February 6, 2015, three African-American citizens filed a suit against the Democratic Party of Virginia because the party used a "fire house" primary/unassembled caucus to select its nominee for a special election to fill a vacancy in the House of Delegates created by the resignation of Joseph D. “Joe” Morrissey.  Morrissey resigned after he was convicted of taking liberties with a female staff member.  The party decided to allow only the 50 voting committee members living in that district to pick a candidate instead of a process that would allow all registered voters to participate.  A majority of voters in the district are African- Americans.  As a result, the party selected a candidate other than Morrissey, who ran as an independent.  Morrissey won the election, and is now serving on a daily release from his prison cell. The suit alleges a Voting Rights Act violation.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://richmondfreepress.com/news/2015/feb/06/state-dems-hit-voting-rights-suit/?page=1|title=State Dems hit with voting rights suit|first=Jeremy |last=Lazarus |date=February 6, 2015|work=Richmond Times Dispatch|accessdate=February 8, 2015}}</ref>
+Citizens can file civil suits under the Voting Rights Act. On February 6, 2015, three African-American citizens filed a suit against the Democratic Party of Virginia because the party used a "fire house" primary/unassembled caucus to select its nominee for a special election to fill a vacancy in the House of Delegates created by the resignation of Joseph D. “Joe” Morrissey.  Morrissey resigned after he was convicted of taking liberties with a female staff member.  The party decided to allow only the 50 voting committee members living in that district to pick a candidate instead of a process that would allow all registered voters to participate.  A majority of voters in the district are African- Americans.  As a result, the party selected a candidate other than Morrissey, who ran as an independent.  Morrissey won the election, and is now serving on a daily release from his prison cell. The suit alleges a Voting Rights Act violation.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://richmondfreepress.com/news/2015/feb/06/state-dems-hit-voting-rights-suit/?page=1|title=State Dems hit with voting rights suit|first=Jeremy |last=Lazarus |date=February 6, 2015|work=Richmond Free Press|accessdate=February 8, 2015}}</ref>
 ==See also==

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:14, February 9, 2015
Line 29:		Line 29:

	In recent years it has enabled liberals in [[Washington, D.C.]] to block reforms such as voter ID sought by local jurisdictions in 16 states. However, it should be noted that Georgia's voter ID law was precleared and that a three-judge panel allowed South Carolina's voter ID law to take effect (albeit modified by a state interpretation during the trial).<ref>''South Carolina v. United States'' (D.D.C. 2012)</ref> The entire State of Texas was subjected to ongoing federal control of its elections until it successfully bails out of being a covered jurisdiction in part because Texas once printed its ballots in English rather than Spanish. Texas has also had more objections to changes in its voting procedures from 1966 to 2004 than any other covered state.<ref>''Northwest Austin Mun. Utility Dist. No. One v. Mukasey'' 573 F.Supp.2d. 221, 281 (D.D.C. 2008)</ref>		In recent years it has enabled liberals in [[Washington, D.C.]] to block reforms such as voter ID sought by local jurisdictions in 16 states. However, it should be noted that Georgia's voter ID law was precleared and that a three-judge panel allowed South Carolina's voter ID law to take effect (albeit modified by a state interpretation during the trial).<ref>''South Carolina v. United States'' (D.D.C. 2012)</ref> The entire State of Texas was subjected to ongoing federal control of its elections until it successfully bails out of being a covered jurisdiction in part because Texas once printed its ballots in English rather than Spanish. Texas has also had more objections to changes in its voting procedures from 1966 to 2004 than any other covered state.<ref>''Northwest Austin Mun. Utility Dist. No. One v. Mukasey'' 573 F.Supp.2d. 221, 281 (D.D.C. 2008)</ref>
		+	==Private cause of action==
		+	Citizens can file civil suits under the Voting Rights Act. On February 6, 2015, three African-American citizens filed a suit against the Democratic Party of Virginia because the party used a "fire house" primary/unassembled caucus to select its nominee for a special election to fill a vacancy in the House of Delegates created by the resignation of Joseph D. “Joe” Morrissey. Morrissey resigned after he was convicted of taking liberties with a female staff member. The party decided to allow only the 50 voting committee members living in that district to pick a candidate instead of a process that would allow all registered voters to participate. A majority of voters in the district are African- Americans. As a result, the party selected a candidate other than Morrissey, who ran as an independent. Morrissey won the election, and is now serving on a daily release from his prison cell. The suit alleges a Voting Rights Act violation.<ref>{{cite news\|url=http://richmondfreepress.com/news/2015/feb/06/state-dems-hit-voting-rights-suit/?page=1\|title=State Dems hit with voting rights suit\|first=Jeremy \|last=Lazarus \|date=February 6, 2015\|work=Richmond Times Dispatch\|accessdate=February 8, 2015}}</ref>

	==See also==		==See also==

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:40, October 26, 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	The '''National Voting Rights Act of 1965'''<ref>42 U.S.C. § 1973-1973aa-6</ref> authorized, and in some areas required, federal oversight of elections and election laws. Many (but not all) of these areas were in the [[Democratic]]~~ally controlled South~~. The Act gave the Department of Justice the power to approve or reject any change in a voting law in certain districts where less than 50% of the population were registered to vote in 1964.	+	The '''National Voting Rights Act of 1965'''<ref>42 U.S.C. § 1973-1973aa-6</ref> authorized, and in some areas required, federal oversight of elections and election laws. Many (but not all) of these areas were in the South, which was at that time controlled by the [[Democratic Party]]. The Act gave the Department of Justice the power to approve or reject any change in a voting law in certain districts where less than 50% of the population were registered to vote in 1964.

	Sections 2 and 5 are the most important parts of the Voting Rights Act. Section 2 prohibits racial discrimination in elections nationwide, and is relatively non-controversial. But Section 5 imposes "temporary" restrictions on certain "covered" regions that require those regions (9 states, mostly in the South, are covered in whole, and another 7 states are covered in part) to obtain pre-clearance by the federal government for any changes in election procedures. This "temporary" restriction was intended to last only five years, but has been repeatedly been extended, most recently in 2006 for another 25 years.		Sections 2 and 5 are the most important parts of the Voting Rights Act. Section 2 prohibits racial discrimination in elections nationwide, and is relatively non-controversial. But Section 5 imposes "temporary" restrictions on certain "covered" regions that require those regions (9 states, mostly in the South, are covered in whole, and another 7 states are covered in part) to obtain pre-clearance by the federal government for any changes in election procedures. This "temporary" restriction was intended to last only five years, but has been repeatedly been extended, most recently in 2006 for another 25 years.