Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Are_grits_groceries

(17,111 posts)
Tue Jun 25, 2013, 11:08 AM Jun 2013

It's a twofer:Although Section 5 is technically left intact, it is effectively nullified

<snip>
The court, split on ideological lines, did not go as far as striking down Section 5 of the law, known as the preclearance provision, which requires certain states to get approval from the Justice Department or a federal court before making election-law changes.

But a majority did invalidate Section 4 of the act, which sets the formula for states covered by Section 5 and was based on historic patterns of discrimination against minority voters.

Although Section 5 is technically left intact, it is effectively nullified, at least for the near future, as Congress would now need to pass new legislation setting a new formula before it can be applied again.

As a result, the ruling is a heavy blow for civil rights advocates, who believe the loss of a working preclearance program could lead to an increase in attempts to deter minorities from voting. They say that 31 proposals made by covered jurisdictions to modify election laws have been blocked by the Justice Department under Section 5 since the law was re-enacted in 2006.
<snip>
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE95O0TU20130625?irpc=932

Partisan asshats!

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
It's a twofer:Although Section 5 is technically left intact, it is effectively nullified (Original Post) Are_grits_groceries Jun 2013 OP
That's the way I read it. I wonder if the DOJ will read it differently? byeya Jun 2013 #1
I didn't think it was possible to murder MLK again, but I was wrong. MichiganVote Jun 2013 #2
Hey JustAnotherGen Jun 2013 #3
Next up, women and Roe v. Wade MichiganVote Jun 2013 #4
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»It's a twofer:Although Se...