TribLIVE

| USWorld

 
Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

House GOP member: High court blundered with Voting Rights Act decision

Email Newsletters

Click here to sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Daily Photo Galleries

'American Coyotes' Series

Traveling by Jeep, boat and foot, Tribune-Review investigative reporter Carl Prine and photojournalist Justin Merriman covered nearly 2,000 miles over two months along the border with Mexico to report on coyotes — the human traffickers who bring illegal immigrants into the United States. Most are Americans working for money and/or drugs. This series reports how their operations have a major impact on life for residents and the environment along the border — and beyond.

By Bloomberg News
Wednesday, July 17, 2013, 8:30 p.m.
 

WASHINGTON — A House Republican lawmaker said the Supreme Court's decision, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, rolling back a core part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act “severely weakened” election protections.

Rep. James Sensenbrenner told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that Roberts's majority opinion ignored provisions in the law that allow voting jurisdictions to escape coverage if they show compliance with anti-discrimination rules.

The fact that areas targeted by the law haven't qualified for that escape provision “is evidence that the VRA's extraordinary measures are still necessary,” said Sensenbrenner, 70. He was House Judiciary Committee chairman when Congress reauthorized the law in 2006.

“Voter discrimination still exists, and our progress toward equality should not be mistaken for a final victory,” the Wisconsin Republican said.

The hearing on the Voting Rights Act was the first by the Judiciary Committee since the Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling on June 25 invalidated the formula for determining which states need federal approval before changing election rules.

The court said Congress lacked grounds for requiring some states, and not others, to obtain federal approval. Roberts's majority opinion said Congress may create a new formula based on current voting conditions in specific jurisdictions.

Less than 16 months before the 2014 election, little consensus has developed between the Democratic majority in the Senate and the Republican-controlled House on revising the landmark civil-rights law. It has been used to halt thousands of state and local voting changes, including voter-identification laws in Texas and South Carolina last year.

“No one's right to vote in any part of this great nation should be suppressed or denied, but yet we continue to see that discriminatory practice today,” said Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat.

Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa, the top Republican on the Judiciary panel, urged Democrats to propose a fix to the court's ruling.

“We could cover the whole country,” Grassley said. “We could identify jurisdictions engaging in discrimination in the 21st century.” On the day of the court's ruling, he said the law was no longer necessary because states covered by it “don't have discriminatory voting any more.”

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.

 

 


Show commenting policy

Most-Read Nation

  1. Pollard, spy for Israel, to be set free
  2. GOP says there’s no deal with Clinton on Benghazi testimony
  3. Congress embraces highway bill
  4. Republicans seek firing of IRS chief in feud over missing emails
  5. Cruz chided over remarks in prelude to Ex-Im Bank vote
  6. Boy Scouts of America votes to end controversial ban on openly gay leaders
  7. Nuke arms program gets 4-star leadership
  8. House, Senate clash over highway funds before Friday deadline
  9. Feds probe timing of ticket cost at airlines days after Amtrak crash in Philadelphia
  10. Fiat Chrysler to buy back more than 500K Ram pickups
  11. Police try to see if man killed by escort was linked to crimes against women