U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Part of Voting Rights Act: The Decision and The Reactions

Section 4 defines the formula used to determine which states are required to have to the federal government pre-clear their systems for voting and elections.

In today’s case, Shelby County v. Holder, the nation’s high court said the formula can no longer be used as a basis for subjecting jurisdictions like Georgia to preclearance.

In writing the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts said, “There is no denying, however, that the conditions that originally justified these measures no longer characterize voting in the covered jurisdictions.”

Roberts goes on to say, “At the same time, voting discrimination still exists; no one doubts that. The question is whether the Act’s ex­traordinary measures, including its disparate treatment of the States, continue to satisfy constitutional requirements. As we put it a short time ago, ‘the Act imposes current burdens and must be justified by current needs.’ North­west Austin, 557 U. S., at 203.”

You can read or download the complete text of the ruling here. 

Related News and Materials:

NPR’s ongoing coverage is here.

The U.S. Justice Department has a large amount of background information on the Voting Rights Act available online, including a history of federal voting rights laws, a list of covered jurisdictions, and an overview of federal voting rights enforcement (especially regarding Section 4 and Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which figured so prominently in today’s ruling).

Update 1:25 p.m.

Reactions to today’s U.S. Supreme Court decision on voting rights have been pouring into the WABE newsroom.

President Obama released a statement saying that he was “deeply disappointed” in the decision:

I am deeply disappointed with the Supreme Court’s decision today.  For nearly 50 years, the Voting Rights Act – enacted and repeatedly renewed by wide bipartisan majorities in Congress – has helped secure the right to vote for millions of Americans.  Today’s decision invalidating one of its core provisions upsets decades of well-established practices that help make sure voting is fair, especially in places where voting discrimination has been historically prevalent.

As a nation, we’ve made a great deal of progress towards guaranteeing every American the right to vote.  But, as the Supreme Court recognized, voting discrimination still exists.    And while today’s decision is a setback, it doesn’t represent the end of our efforts to end voting discrimination.  I am calling on Congress to pass legislation to ensure every American has equal access to the polls.  My Administration will continue to do everything in its power to ensure a fair and equal voting process.

Georgia Attorney General Sam Olens, in a statement, praised the Supreme Court’s decision:

“When the Voting Rights Act was passed in the 1960s, several states and local jurisdictions, including Georgia, discriminated against minority voters. Discrimination is wrong, and Section 5 was an appropriate response.

“I am pleased, however, that the Supreme Court recognized today that, “[n]early 50 years later, things have changed dramatically.”

Congressman John Lewis strongly condemned the decision:

“Today, the Supreme Court stuck a dagger into the heart of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, one of the most effective pieces of legislation Congress has passed in the last 50 years.”

And Georgia Governor Nathan Deal told WABE’s Jonathan Shapiro that the Voting Rights Act had “outlived its usefulness” and that the ruling should finally remove the stigma from Georgia.

We did not receive a reaction to the ruling from the Georgia Republican Party.  However, the reactions of Gov. Deal and Attorney General Olens can be said to represent the position of the Georgia GOP, given that they are two of the highest elected state officials and they are both Republicans. 

Update 4:35 p.m.

Late this afternoon, Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed’s office responded to WABE’s request for a statement on the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Voting Rights Act.  The following is the entire statement that we received:

“The Supreme Court decision in Shelby County vs. Holder is stunningly disappointing and ignores the clear intent of the United States Congress, which has enacted and repeatedly reauthorized the Voting Rights Act since 1965 by wide bipartisan majorities, reflecting the undeniable will of the people that each vote be counted regardless of whether it is cast by an ethnic minority. Unfortunately, the court did away with decades of well-reasoned and established legal precedence upholding the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act, including Section 4 which required certain states including Georgia (except for Sandy Springs) to seek preclearance before making changes to their voting procedures. There is no other way to view this other than as a blow to the rule of law that every citizen with the right to vote shall have his or her vote counted.”

Update 6:00 p.m.

The Georgia Democratic Party’s interim director, Nikema Williams, issued a statement earlier this afternoon, calling the decision “unfathomable.”

“It is unfathomable to me that our High Court would disenfranchise so many citizens,” Williams said. “With a stroke of a pen, the Court has essentially invalidated Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.”

Ms. Williams noted that this decision means that voting problems can only be addressed after the problem has happened.

“Instead of showing the potential impact of discrimination on voters, this change will apply to after-the-fact discrimination. It places the burden of proof on ordinary citizens – those who can least afford lawyers.”

WABE did not receive a statement from the Georgia Republican Party.  But, as noted above, the statements of Gov. Deal and Attorney General Olens can be said to represent the position of the Georgia GOP, given their positions in the party and in the state government.