(Image source: Wikimedia Commons)
BY JEREMY TRUITT
The United States Supreme Court is finally set to make a ruling on a challenge to a key section in the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
The Department of Justice says the act was passed during some of the worst days in the civil rights movement and was initially aimed at stopping disenfranchisement of black voters in the south. The section being challenged requires states with a history of bias to obtain congressional approval prior to changing any voting laws.
The law fully applies to nine states and partially to another seven. SCOTUS blog reports that while the issue has been brought up previously, they decided to hear it this time but are more concerned with a specific question: “Did congress overstep its bounds when it extended the law an additional 25 years?”
Supporters of the law cite the need to continue ensuring minority protection in the face of recent voter-ID laws passed in the United States, which some call inherently discriminatory. The ACLU addressed that idea with this statement:
“As we have seen in a number of states this year, efforts to enact voting laws that target people of color and other groups are unfortunately far too common. We hope the Supreme Court will recognize the vital role this civil rights-era law plays in protecting the fundamental right to vote and ensuring equal access to voting.”
(Image source: Wikimedia Commons)
BY JEREMY TRUITT
The United States Supreme Court is finally set to make a ruling on a challenge to a key section in the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
The Department of Justice says the act was passed during some of the worst days in the civil rights movement and was initially aimed at stopping disenfranchisement of black voters in the south. The section being challenged requires states with a history of bias to obtain congressional approval prior to changing any voting laws.
The law fully applies to nine states and partially to another seven. SCOTUS blog reports that while the issue has been brought up previously, they decided to hear it this time but are more concerned with a specific question: “Did congress overstep its bounds when it extended the law an additional 25 years?”
Supporters of the law cite the need to continue ensuring minority protection in the face of recent voter-ID laws passed in the United States, which some call inherently discriminatory. The ACLU addressed that idea with this statement:
“As we have seen in a number of states this year, efforts to enact voting laws that target people of color and other groups are unfortunately far too common. We hope the Supreme Court will recognize the vital role this civil rights-era law plays in protecting the fundamental right to vote and ensuring equal access to voting.”
