GOP lawmaker vows fix to Voting Rights Act
A former chairman of the House Judiciary Committee said on Monday he will try to replace the portion of the landmark Voting Rights Act that was struck down by the Supreme Court earlier this summer.
“The first thing we have to do is take the monkey wrench that the court threw in it out of the Voting Rights Act, and then use that monkey wrench to be able to fix it so that it is alive, well, constitutional and impervious to another challenge that will be filed by the usual suspects,” said Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., at a March on Washington 50th anniversary event hosted by the Republican National Committee.
Sensenbrenner's comments were first reported Monday by The Washington Post. The lawmaker said he hopes to have a legislative fix in place by the end of the year.
Sensenbrenner was chairman of the House Judiciary Committee in 2006 when the law was reauthorized by Congress.
The high court in June struck down a coverage formula that Congress used to monitor Southern states with a history of racial discrimination. The ruling essentially freed states and municipalities with this kind of history from having to clear changes with the Justice Department in the way they vote.
After the decision, GOP state legislatures in Texas and North Carolina have pushed forward with new Voter ID laws that would otherwise have been subject to preclearance. The Justice Department is suing Texas over its law.
In an op-ed column for USA Today in July, Sensenbrenner said any legislative fix to the law “must be politically palatable and comply with the court's interpretation of the Constitution. It will require extensive legal expertise and political input, as this is not an easy puzzle to solve.”
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.