SC’s ruling weakens voting rights protection

The Supreme Court has again dealt a devastating blow to voting equality in the United States. On Wednesday, in Louisiana v. Callais, six justices effectively nullified a 1982 federal statute that prohibits states from running or establishing election systems, such as election districts, that have a discriminatory effect against voters of colour.

Simply put, unless it can be shown that a state or local government acted with the intent of racial discrimination — something very difficult to prove — it will be impossible to successfully challenge laws as having violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 or the Constitution, according to the Tribune News Service.

The Voting Rights Act is, simply put, one of the most important federal laws adopted during my lifetime. Although the 15th Amendment, adopted in 1870, prohibits denying someone the right to vote based on race, this was a hollow promise due to an array of practices used to keep Black individuals from voting. In Mississippi in 1964, for example, only 6.7% of eligible Black citizens were registered to vote. At the time it had the highest Black population of any state in the US.

Two key provisions in the Voting Rights Act were used to prevent racial discrimination in voting. Section 5 provided that jurisdictions with a history of race discrimination in voting needed to get preapproval from the US attorney general for any significant change in their election systems. Hundreds of actions by state and local governments deemed discriminatory were blocked, and likely countless more discriminatory actions weren’t even attempted because of the understanding that preclearance would be denied. But in 2013, in Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court nullified the preclearance requirement on the grounds that it unconstitutionally treated some states differently than others. No state has had to get preclearance since, and many state laws that were stopped for being discriminatory have since gone into effect.

In writing for the court in Shelby County, Chief Justice John Roberts offered reassurance that there was still another key provision of the Voting Rights Act: Section 2, which says that state and local governments cannot run election systems that discriminate against voters of color.

In 1980, in City of Mobile v. Bolden, the court held that proving race discrimination in voting requires proof that the government acted with the intent to disadvantage voters of color. But it is enormously difficult to prove discriminatory intent, and the reality is that legislators will rarely openly express a racist motive for their actions. In response to the court’s decision, Congress amended Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act in 1982 to provide that proof of a racially discriminatory effect would be sufficient to show a violation of the law.

Louisiana v. Callais was focused on Section 2, focusing on state congressional districts. After the 2020 census, Louisiana redrew its six congressional districts, creating one with a majority Black population. A federal district court found that Louisiana violated Section 2 because of the discriminatory effect against Black individuals — who comprise about 35% of Louisiana’s population — of having only one district with a majority Black population. Louisiana then redrew its maps to create two districts that were majority Black.

The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision on Wednesday with Justice Samuel Alito writing for the majority, said that based on prior decisions it is unconstitutional for the government to consider race in drawing election districts. The court added that avoiding a racially discriminatory effect, which would be a violation of Section 2, does not justify allowing consideration of race. Justice Elena Kagan in dissent said that the effect of this would be that those challenging state and local elections systems as discriminatory “will have to show, as well, race-based motive. Now, as then, that requirement will make success in their suits nearly impossible.”