BLOODY SUNDAY AND THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT

Post by Maple Heights African American Gazette.

NEWSLETTER: NAACP ON VOTING RIGHTS ACT

Friends -- On February 27, 2013, the United States Supreme Court heard the case of Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder, which challenged the constitutionality of the “preclearance” provisions of the VRA.  The NAACP submitted an Amicus Brief on behalf of Attorney General Holder and the Voting Rights Act.  Last Tuesday, June 25, 2013, the Supreme Court issued its decision in which the Court did not invalidate the principle that preclearance can be required. But much more importantly, it held that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, which sets out the formula that is used to determine which state and local jurisdictions must comply under Section 5’s preapproval requirement, is unconstitutional and can no longer be used. Thus, although Section 5 survives, it will have no actual effect unless and until Congress can enact a new statute to determine who should be covered by it.  This means that there is no longer a mechanism in place to prevent states with a history of voter disenfranchisement from enacting such laws.     Thus it is now up to Congress and the President to pass a new law to determine which jurisdictions should need to be “precleared” before making any changes to their voting laws or procedures.  Over the next few months, the NAACP will work with Members of Congress and the Administration, to craft a bipartisan, bicameral bill that can and will get signed into law and which will stand future scrutiny of the U.S. Supreme Court which protects the voting rights of every American, regardless of his or her race or ethnicity. For more information on the Voting Rights Act, the Supreme Court's decision, what the NAACP is doing, and most importantly what you can do, please review the attached Issue Alert. Thank you, Hilary

SUPREME COURT TO HEAR SHELBY COUNTY ARGUMENT AGAINST VOTING RIGHTS ACT

 

NAACP warns Supreme Court: Thwart assault on Voting Rights Act or risk return to ‘old poison’

 

 

 

"Debo Adegbile to go before supreme court to defend Voting Rights Act and argue key provision should not be struck down"

 

 

"The lawyer who will  ..." [Wednesday, February 27, 2013] "go before the US supreme court to defend the Voting Rights Act has warned that if a key provision of the law that prevents discrimination at the polling booth largely in southern states is struck down, it would “set the hands of the clock winding backwards” for millions of minority voters.

 

 

Debo Adegbile, special counsel for the NAACP, the country’s largest civil rights organisation, will have the momentous task on Wednesday of defending one of the mainstays of America’s prolonged struggle against racial discrimination.

 

 

Lined up against him will be an array of conservative lawyers and legislators, many based in the south, where the sting of the legislation is felt most keenly.

 

 

Wednesday’s hearing, in which the nine supreme court justices will hear oral argument before delivering a ruling expected in June, is being seen as the greatest threat to the Voting Rights Act since it was enacted in 1965. The focus of the debate will be Section 5, a provision under which 16 states – mainly though not exclusively in the south – are subject to stringent federal monitoring designed to prevent them discriminating against African American and other minority voters."

 

 

Follow rest of article HERE

 

 

Related articles, etc:

 

 

VOTING RIGHTS ACT

 

 
 

 

SECTION 5 of Voting Rights Act: "Section 5 currently applies to nine states in their entirety: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia. It also applies to identified parts of a further seven states: California, Florida, Michigan, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina and South Dakota."

 

 

SHELBYCOUNTY V HOLDER TARGET THE HEART OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY

 

 

RACIAL ENTITLEMENT- Term used by JUSTICE SCALIA:    "Scalia has generally voted to strike down laws which make distinctions by race, gender, or sexual orientation .... "   "To pursue the concept of racial entitlement – even for the most admirable and benign of purposes – is to reinforce and preserve for future mischief the way of thinking that produced race slavery, race privilege and race hatred. In the eyes of government, we are just one race here. It is American.^{[74] "[WIKIPEDIA]}

 

 

 

 

MAPLE HEIGHTS - DENIAL OF VOTE FOR DISTRICT 5

 

 

 

 

THINK THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT IS OUTDATED? COME TO SOUTH CAROLINA





WHY THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT IS AS IMPORTANT TODAY AS IT WAS IN 1965







SOTOMAYOR LEADS LIBERAL JUSTICES IN DEFENDING THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT
 

 

 

 

RALLY ON STEPS OF SUPREME COURT FEB 27TH TO PROTECT VOTING RIGHTS

From "The National Urban League Wire":

 

Published: Tue. Feb 5, 2013 at 5:01 pm | Updated: Tue. Feb 5, 2013 at 5:10 pm |

"From the President's Desk [President of the Urban League]:

 

If the widespread voter suppression efforts across the nation in the last two years has demonstrated anything, it’s that the Voting Rights Act is as necessary in 2015 as it was when it was signed in 1965.

But on Feb. 27, the Supreme Court will consider eliminating all or part of the government's strongest defense against discrimination.

Section 5 of the Voting Right Act requires all or parts of 16 states with a history of discrimination in voting to get federal approval before making any changes in the way they hold elections. Under Section 5, the U.S. Department of Justice was able to block several discriminatory voter suppression measures in the last year.

But Shelby County, AL v. Holder challenges Section 5, saying it's no longer necessary. The National Urban League along with other civil rights and advocacy groups, will rally on the steps of the Supreme Court on February 27 to say it is still necessary.

Voter suppression efforts in the last two years threatened the constitutional rights of nearly 5 million people. If we want the Voting Rights Act to defend us, we have to defend it. Join us on February 27 and stand up for the integrity of the electoral process."

 

 

 

National Urban League


-