D.C. Court of Appeals upholds constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Aaahhh, this will give Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne another sad. Court after court — just as they have always done since 1965 – has upheld the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act which requires Justice Department preclearance for election laws in states with a history of racial discrimination like Arizona.

Today,the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, affirming the summary judgment of the D.C. District Court. Press release from The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. D.C. Circuit Upholds Constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965:

In Shelby County, Alabama vs. Holder, the court rejected an argument advanced by attorneys for Shelby County, Alabama, that the legislative record did not support the 2006 reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act, identifying numerous examples of modern instances of racial discrimination in voting that sustain Congress's findings.

"The court properly found that this key provision of the Voting Rights Act is still needed to ensure that minorities can fully exercise their constitutional right to vote free from discrimination," said Lawyers' Committee Executive Director Barbara R. Arnwine.  "This is an important victory in the defense of Section 5." 

"The Court properly found that Congress's decision to maintain Section 5 was grounded in the many instances of recent voting discrimination," said Jon Greenbaum, chief counsel for the Lawyers' Committee, who argued before the district court in this case. 

In April 2010, Shelby County (a largely white suburb of Birmingham) filed suit in federal court in Washington, DC asking that Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act be declared unconstitutional.  Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder, No. 1:10-cv-00651 (D.D.C.).  The county, naming Attorney General Holder the defendant in the case, claimed that Congress did not have the constitutional authority, in 2006, to reauthorize Section 5 for another 25 years. 

On August 25, 2010, the Lawyers' Committee, representing Bobby Lee Harris, a former council member of the Town of Alabaster (located in Shelby County), intervened in the lawsuit to defend the constitutionality of Section 5.  Other defendant interveners include Shelby County residents, represented by the NAACP LDF and the ACLU Voting Rights Project. 

On September 21, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia upheld the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act against Shelby County's challenge.  Shelby County filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which is the subject of today's ruling. 

The Lawyers' Committee has been at the forefront in seeking to ensure that Section 5 continues to protect minority voters against discriminatory voting changes.  In 2005, the Lawyers' Committee established the National Commission on the Voting Rights Act to determine whether serious and widespread discrimination in voting has continued in the jurisdictions covered by Section 5.  In February 2006, the Commission issued a detailed report on its findings, and Congress then relied on the Commission's report when it concluded, later that year, that Section 5 should again be reauthorized.   Many of the factual findings cited in today's opinion were taken from the Commission's work.

Please click here for the court's decision.

Ryan J. Reilly reports at Talking Points Memo, Ruling On Voting Rights Act Sets Up Supreme Court Showdown | TPM:

Law school professor Rick Hasen says he expects the case, brought by Shelby County, will end up in the Supreme Court in short order.

“I expect Shelby County to seek cert., and for the Court to agree to hear this case next term, with a decision likely by June 2013,” writes Hasen. “It is also possible that another one of these cases, such as the Texas or South Carolina section 5 challenges related to their voter i.d. laws, could leapfrog over these cases and be heard first by the Court.”

Laughlin McDonald, director of the ACLU Voting Rights Project, said the ruling “recognizes the need to uphold the Voting Rights Act in order to ensure every eligible American citizen can vote, regardless of race or language ability. Our cherished right to vote is under a continuous attack in Alabama and across the country, and millions of voters could be blocked from voting in upcoming elections. It is crystal clear that we must have these protections in place so that does not happen.”