Debate Club

Should the Supreme Court Strike Down the 'Preclearance' Provision of the Voting Rights Act? >

The Supreme Court Should Side with Congress on Voting Rights Act

The Constitution requires the Supreme Court to side with Congress on the Voting Rights Act

February 27, 2013

About David Gans:

David Gans is director of the Human Rights, Civil Rights, and Citizenship Program at Constitutional Accountability Center.

This week, in one of the most important voting rights cases in decades, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Shelby County v. Holder, a constitutional challenge to a core provision of the Voting Rights Act. The Voting Rights Act is perhaps the most successful civil rights law in our nation's history, which has protected the right to vote for millions of Americans. Shelby County argues that this iconic statute is now outdated, and that bipartisan majorities of Congress violated the Constitution when they voted by huge margins to renew this celebrated law in 2006.

The biggest problem with Shelby County's argument is the Constitution itself, which explicitly gives to Congress broad power to "enforce" by "appropriate legislation" the Constitution's prohibition on racial discrimination in voting. In the Voting Rights Act, Congress used this express power to ensure that the right to vote would be a reality for all persons regardless of race.

[See a collection of political cartoons on Congress.]

Shelby County argues that the South has changed, but Congress—the body specifically charged in the text with enforcing the Constitution's command of equality in the voting booth—disagreed. In 2006, amidst progress, Congress found continuing racial discrimination in voting, concentrated in many of the same states that resisted the 15th Amendment and made the Voting Rights Act a necessity. In places like Selma, Ala.— which played a historic role in the law's enactment in 1965—governments sought to strip minorities of hard-won gains at the very moment racial minorities were about to succeed at the polls. Elsewhere, white elected officials even went to the extreme of cancelling an election to prevent African-Americans from electing their candidate of choice. The Voting Rights Act continues to play an essential role in preventing discriminatory voting changes such as these.

[Read the U.S. News Debate: Should Photo ID Be Required to Vote?]

Shelby County should be an easy case. The Constitution's text expressly gives to Congress the power to enforce the Constitution's prohibition against racial discrimination in voting, arming Congress with substantial power to ensure that our most precious fundamental right is enjoyed by all Americans regardless of race. The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld this very act, and the record developed by Congress shows that racial discrimination in voting is still a blot on our Constitution's promise of voting equality. The question now, as the justices hear oral argument, is whether the Roberts Court will follow the Constitution or subvert it.

Tags:
Supreme Court,
voters
Other Arguments
#1

No — Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is needed now more than ever

WENDY WEISER, Director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law

#3

No — Preclearance provision of Voting Rights Act is still stopping discrimination today

WADE HENDERSON, President and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights

#4
#5

Yes — The days of preventing minorities from voting are long gone

EDWARD BLUM, Visiting Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute

#6

Reader Comments ()

About Debate Club

A meeting of the sharpest minds on the day's most important topics, Debate Club brings in the best arguments and lets readers decide which is the most persuasive. Read the arguments, then vote. And be sure to check back often to see who has gotten the most support—and also to see what's being discussed now in the Debate Club.

Have ideas about what the Club should be debating? E-mail it to dclub@usnews.com.

You can also join the debate on Facebook or follow Debate Club on Twitter.

Advertisement
Cartoons
Thomas Jefferson Street Blog
IRS, AP and Benghazi Show the Failure of Obama's Big Government

Giving an inefficient organization like the IRS more responsibility makes it more likely to screw up, not better able to solve this nation’s problems.

Coburn Wants Oklahoma Tornado Aid Offset With Budget Cuts

Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn wants spending cuts before aid is sent to tornado victims in his own state.

Crowdfunding Zack Braff's Film And Robert Griffin's Gifts Is a Mistake

Rich people don't need donations from the public.

Poll Shows Americans Find Obama's IRS Story Barely Believable

There is still something fishy about the scandal at the IRS.

Do Benghazi, AP and IRS Scandals Reflect Obama’s Leadership Style?

It may be that a flawed leadership style is filtering down to the rest of the government.

In Marine Umbrella Incident, Republicans Still Deny Obama Is President

Umbrellagate is more proof that Obama's critics cannot acknowledge that he is, indeed, president.

Obama Isn't Nixon, but Needs More Friends in Washington

President Barack Obama needs to make more friends in Washington.

Republicans Can't Forget the Economy During Obama Scandals

Scandals provide good fodder for the GOP, but it can't forget about fixing unemployment.

Advertisement