Supreme Court VRA Decision

[HQWest]

Originally Posted by maconmagnolia

These Supreme Court cases have really intrigued me.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/25/politi...html?hpt=hp_t1

This morning, the SCOTUS announced that they have struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act. The decision was 5-4. Any opinions on this?

The argument seems to be that - instead of highlighting particular counties or states for scrutiny or oversight because of past bad acts (more than 40 years ago), we should assume that these counties will not now revert to their past bad actions and that the money could be better used for general oversight or to responding to specific complaints. Does that sound about right?

[maconmagnolia]

Originally Posted by HQWest

The argument seems to be that - instead of highlighting particular counties or states for scrutiny or oversight because of past bad acts (more than 40 years ago), we should assume that these counties will not now revert to their past bad actions and that the money could be better used for general oversight or to responding to specific complaints. Does that sound about right?

That's what it seems to me.

This is huge for supporters of Voter ID laws, as the federal government recently shot down Voter ID laws in South Carolina and Texas, two states who's laws were being monitored by the federal government.

[TonyB06]

The debate will inflame passions on both sides of the political aisle. The former status quo (approved 98-0 in the 2006 Senate) was a good deal for the GOP, allowing them to vote for the VRA, doing their good deed for civil rights, while ensuring that those black and brown islands were surrounded by white conservative districts, which, given broader demographic trends are all that allow them to retain House control presently. That won’t be as easy going forward. The left will still challenge the maps, and each decisions will be parsed for bias.

Writ large, as all the SC court justices age, I think those on the right are making a gambit on a number of issues while they still hold power, recognizing that President Obama will make any appointments through 2016, and, perhaps subconsciously, fearing an HRC victory in 2016, I dunno.
They certainly are portraying themselves as the “activist court,” an ideology they claim to detest except when it suits their political view of the world.