The Fifteenth Amendment is not designed to punish for the past; its purpose is to ensure a better future. To serve that purpose, Congress—if it is to divide the States—must identify those jurisdictions to be singled out on a basis that makes sense in light of current conditions.The Court struck down the Voting Rights Act's singling out of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia, in addition to a few counties and municipalities in other states, as political units so likely to engage in ruses to prevent blacks from voting that they cannot be permitted to alter even the most trivial aspects of their voting procedures without pre-clearance from the federal Justice Department. This marks an end to pre-empt redistricting proposals and voter i.d. laws in the states the powers-that-be love to hate, though it still will be possible to sue to change procedures after the fact if the procedures can be demonstrated to violate the Voting Rights Act, according to standards that apply equally to all states.
The Court did not directly strike down the "pre-clearance" section (Section 5) but the section that sets out the formula for maintaining the permanent list of enemy states (Section 4). The Government admitted that the formula was reverse-engineered; it identified the miscreants and then dreamed up a formula that would snag them. The Court felt that any attempt to identify evil states should be based on current information, not 50-year-old grudges. Whether or not the Justice Department has noticed, voter registration and voting patterns have reached something very close to parity in the states previously identified as hopelessly racist.
Maybe the Justice Department will have time now to consider the prevalent of racism in other contexts. Not to mention important issues of transgender discrimination. Is there room to hope they'll address the abuse of bureaucratic discretion to target the politically unsound? As long as we're worrying about equal protection under the laws and all that.
4 comments:
It would have been nice had the Court listened to Justice Thomas and struck Section V, also, but this is a good start.
Striking all of the VRA, in fact, would not have eliminated the opportunity to sue over voting misbehaviors after the fact; only the elsewhere illegal prior restraint would have been eliminated.
It would have been good, too, had the Supremes listened to Thomas here and for Roberts to have listened to himself from a few years ago (The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.) with Fisher, but they punted there.
Eric Hines
It's sort of sad to have to retire our privileged position on the List of Enemy States. But I have hope that the Holder Justice Department will find a way to restore the honor.
The Democrats have not forgotten how Southerners betrayed the cause, as they saw it.
Although Blue Dog Democrats have to pay lip service to certain local customs, it does not stop them from being loyal and beneficial members of the Leftist alliance.
Once again, I had a long comment vanish after I'd posted it. I wonder what's going on. You fellow writers aren't playing tricks on old Grim, are you? That would be very unkind. :)
Post a Comment