![]() The court instead faithfully applied its precedent, including a case from 1986 that sets out a three-part test for these cases. Alabama’s argument would have required the court to abandon that case.Īs Chief Justice Roberts noted for the majority, “The heart of these cases is not about the law as it exists. ![]() In Thursday’s decision, the justices - with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joining the three more liberal justices in the 5–4 ruling - rejected Alabama’s argument. Most commentators therefore thought the justices would similarly narrow that protection of the Voting Rights Act this year. In 2021, the court curtailed the reach of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits a voting law that has the effect of racial discrimination, by making up “guideposts” a plaintiff must satisfy to bring a successful claim. It effectively took away the preclearance mechanism of the Voting Rights Act - which required states with a history of discrimination to seek preapproval of voting changes from a federal court or the Department of Justice before the voting rules could go into effect - in the infamous Shelby County decision 10 years ago. It essentially blessed strict voter ID laws and partisan gerrymandering. In a series of recent cases, the court has unduly deferred to state legislatures in its rules on how to run elections. ![]() Opinion: I wrote the declassification rules, and they leave Trump largely defenseless AFP PHOTO / SAUL LOEB (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images) Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images/FILE US President Donald Trump speaks during a retreat with Republican lawmakers at Camp David in Thurmont, Maryland, January 6, 2018.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |