A caller study from the House Rules Committee has recovered that favoritism against voters has accrued since the Supreme Court’s Shelby decision.
The Supreme Court contended successful the Shelby v. Holder determination that cardinal provisions of the Voting Rights Act were nary longer necessary.
However, the House Rules Committee recovered that Shelby opened the doorway to a caller question of elector suppression:
The grounds demonstrates that the federation has not changed arsenic dramatically arsenic the Court’s majority whitethorn person thought. In the 8 years since Shelby County was decided, states person taken important steps toward suppressing the vote. Across the country, states person purged millions of voters from the voting rolls; enacted a rash of strict elector ID laws; attempted to instrumentality documentary impervious of citizenship laws; failed to supply indispensable connection access and assistance to limited-English proficiency voters; closed, consolidated, oregon relocated hundreds if not thousands of polling locations, causing voters to hold successful long, burdensome lines to vote; attempted to chopped backmost connected opportunities to ballot extracurricular of Election Day; and employed changes to methods of elections, jurisdictional boundaries, and redistricting arsenic methods to dilute and disenfranchise number voters.
Litigation nether Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution has proven to beryllium a powerful but inadequate instrumentality to combat the question of elector suppression tactics unleashed successful the years since Shelby.
Voter Turnout Increased In 2018 and 2020 Despite Voter Suppression Laws
The 2018 and 2020 elections saw grounds elector turnout. While this is so an result to beryllium celebrated, it is not, arsenic immoderate argue, an denotation that elector suppression and favoritism nary longer exists. The grounds gathered by the Subcommittee demonstrates that voters turned out successful grounds numbers despite suppressive voting laws and a once-in-a-century pandemic.
And yet, the absorption of Republican-led legislatures astir the state to historical elector turnout has been to unleash a caller question of restrictive voting laws successful the months pursuing the 2020 election. States with a past of discriminatory voting practices and racially polarized voting proceed to enact voting laws without analyzing whether these provisions discriminate against number voters.
The Time To Pass Voter Protection Laws Is Now
The Committee wrote that the clip to enactment is now.
We are present astatine an inflection constituent successful protecting our democracy. The clip has travel for Congress to utilize its law authorization to support the cardinal close to ballot for each Americans. As Mr. Henderson stated earlier the Subcommittee, “[f]or ideology to enactment for all of us, it indispensable see each of us.” It is unacceptable that successful 2021, 56 years aft the VRA’s passage,” Ms. Nelson stated, that “the close to ballot remains truthful precise under-protected. . . .This model is not sustainable nor is it acceptable.”
There is nary crushed for Congress not to act. Since 2013, erstwhile the Supreme Court lied astir a diminution successful favoritism against voters, the onslaught against ideology by Republicans has been unrelenting.
Trump’s large prevarication brought it to the forefront, but Democrats tin longer beryllium backmost and let Republicans to spot distant astatine democracy.
Democrats indispensable enactment to support the close to vote, oregon our ideology volition perish.
Mr. Easley is the managing editor. He is besides a White House Press Pool and a Congressional analogous for PoliticusUSA. Jason has a Bachelor’s Degree successful Political Science. His postgraduate enactment focused connected nationalist policy, with a specialization successful societal betterment movements.
Awards and Professional Memberships
Member of the Society of Professional Journalists and The American Political Science Association
English (US) ·