Also read: discrimination, voting rights, President Barack Obama, Clarence Thomas, Supreme Court
Black voters no longer need voting protections, according to Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas.
On Monday, the justices announced by an 8-1 decision not to hear a case on the constitutionality of Section 5 of The Voting Rights Act of 1965. The disputed provision gives the U.S. Department of Justice permission to review any proposed election-law changes in several states, mainly in the south, with histories of discriminatory practices.
Thomas, who has had a less than favorable opinion of the provision, was the only dissenter and would've voted to strike down the law, according to The New York Times, if it had come to a vote.
Click here to read "Lessons on Personal Responsibility From a Top Discrimination Lawyer."
Click here to read "Discrimination Charges Hit 5-Year High; Retaliation, Religion Set New Records."
Click here to read "National Commentator's View: The Truth About Clarence Thomas."
Thomas, saying he would find the law unconstitutional, wrote: "The extensive pattern of discrimination that led the court to previously uphold Section 5 as enforcing the 15th Amendment [right to vote] no longer exists. Covered jurisdictions are not now engaged in a systematic campaign to deny Black citizens access to the ballot through intimidation and violence."
At issue is the 1965 law that made voting a reality for Blacks. Until its passage, states and counties used egregious literacy and memorization tests and intimidation to hinder Blacks from registering to vote and actually casting ballots. In 1982, Congress revised the act to say states may not thwart voters' chances to elect the representative of their choice.
This isn't the first time the high court has sidestepped this looming constitutional issue. (This time it was spurred by a lawsuit brought by a small Texas utility district.) In March, a split Supreme Court voted to limit the reach of the Voting Rights Act, saying only districts where Blacks are in the voting-age minority are protected by the law.
The justices, then voting 5-4, said officials should not consider race when drawing district lines for county boards, city councils and school districts, a decision Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, speaking for the majority opinion, says speaks to the true intent of the Voting Rights Act.
"Racial discrimination and racially polarized voting are not ancient history," Kennedy said. But the goal of the act, he continued, was to "hasten the waning of racism in American politics," rather than "entrench racial differences."
In April, the court heard oral arguments in which challengers and critics cited the election of President Barack Obama as proof that the law was no longer necessary.
Chief Justice John Roberts, along with other conservative members of the court, suggested they agreed with the challengers--a point Roberts reiterated when he announced the court's decision.
"Things have changed in the south," Roberts said.
Readers' Comments
