Supreme Court narrows but preserves Voting Rights Act

The justices leave Section 5 safeguards intact while allowing municipalities with a clean record to 'bail out.' Clarence Thomas dissents, saying he would strike down the provision.

By David G. Savage June 23, 2009
LaTimes.com

Reporting from Washington -- The historic Voting Rights Act -- the 1965 law that ended a century of racial discrimination at the ballot box and gave blacks a political voice across the South -- survived a strong challenge at the Supreme Court on Monday as justices pulled back from a widely anticipated decision to strike down a key part of the law as outdated and unfair to today's South.Instead, the justices agreed to narrow the law's impact by allowing municipalities with a clean record to seek an exemption.

Though the court sided with the Texas water district that brought the case, its 8-1 decision preserved the core of the Voting Rights Act, including its special scrutiny for any changes in election rules by Southern states.The ruling also protected the Roberts court from charges of conservative "judicial activism" in its refusal to tamper with an act of Congress, a often sensitive procedure fraught with political risk.Monday's decision, considered among the most important of the term, came as a surprise and a relief to civil rights advocates.

"This is a Pyrrhic victory for those who were behind bringing this case," said Jon Greenbaum, legal director for the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. "We are glad that . . . the Voting Rights Act remains intact to protect the rights of voters."Civil rights lawyers and liberal activists were prepared to denounce Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and the court's conservatives had they struck down one of the landmark laws of the civil rights era.Three years ago, Congress by overwhelming majorities in the Senate and House extended the law for an additional 25 years. President George W. Bush signed the bill extending the law.

But in January, the court voted to hear a broad challenge. Civil rights advocates were astonished during the oral argument in April when the court's most conservative justices derided the law and signaled they were inclined to throw it out.Without question, Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is an unusual provision. Its effect has been to keep the South under special scrutiny from Washington because of its history of racism.

The law requires most states in the South and more than 12,000 municipalities to "pre-clear" with the Justice Department any changes in their voting and election procedures. These can range from the location of polling places to the shape of electoral districts in the state legislatures. Its original aim was to prevent county officials from adopting schemes such as shifting the hours and places for voter registration to keep blacks off the voter rolls.It has had an enormous impact in its nearly 45-year history, opening the polls to millions of black voters.

"This law has an extremely important symbolic effect even today," said Paul Hancock, who was a veteran Justice Department lawyer and defender of the Voting Rights Act. It forces states and counties to think twice before making changes that would have an unfair impact on black voters and candidates, he said.

To read more, follow link below:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-court-voting23-2009jun23,0,5494880.story