Uncategorized

Supreme Court agrees to hear Alabama Voting Rights Act challenge

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed today to hear the Voting Rights Act challenge out of  Alabama, Shelby County v. Holder, in which county officials claim that  Congress exceeded its authority when it extended the  act’s provisions for another 25 years. The challenge focuses specifically on Section 5 of the act, which requires nine states and parts of seven others (including N.C.) to obtain Department of Justice preclearance for any changes to their voting laws.  The county contends that the formula used to determine which jurisdictions are covered by the section is based upon voting data from 35 years ago and that voting turnout and registration rates now approach parity in many of the covered jurisdictions.

In 2009, the Court came close to striking that section, noting, in the words of Chief Justice John Roberts, that “things had changed in the South.”  Congress has done nothing since to update the formula.

The Court took no action on the Voting Rights Act case out of Kinston, N.C.,  Nix v. Holder. That case will apparently remain pending for review, possibly until the Court rules in the Shelby County case.

9 Comments

  1. JS

    November 10, 2012 at 6:18 pm

    Hey Supreme Court, you didn’t hesitate to go behind America’s back and decide that corporations are people, so what’s stopping you from gerrymandering now?

  2. Frances Jenkins

    November 11, 2012 at 9:58 am

    How many districts in Florida and Ohio have voted 108%?

  3. david esmay

    November 11, 2012 at 12:58 pm

    @frances/alex- 0%

  4. Frances Jenkins

    November 11, 2012 at 3:44 pm

    David can not deal with the truth. You create a world that is totally lacking in truth.

  5. gregflynn

    November 11, 2012 at 5:52 pm

    Frances you are trafficking in innuendo not truth. Wood County Ohio is home to Bowling Green State University which has a transient population. The “100%” number is not based on known eligible voters, it is an extrapolation of “voting age population” from US Census data which is a population estimate. The number representing 108% claimed in right wing blogs, which have obscured the truth, is actually 100% of registered voters in Wood County prior to the election. It was the actual number of people registered to vote in Wood County Ohio on 9/2/2012.

    Ohio has same day registration during early voting just like North Carolina and inactive voters, not included in registration totals are allowed to vote with the proper credentials. It doesn’t take a math major to figure out that early voting registration and voting by voters listed as inactive could increase the number of voters even more over the number that existed prior to early voting.

    Plain ignorance, devoid of truth.

  6. Frances Jenkins

    November 11, 2012 at 6:23 pm

    The problem with Greg/liberals they will not ask questions about voter fraud and if you do then you become the problem.At this point, there is no way you can prove what you are saying. It is like the redistricting issue. The only thing Greg is saying now is redistricting must be redone in order for the Democrats to regain power.

  7. Frances Jenkins

    November 11, 2012 at 6:35 pm

    If 72% of the registered voters in Wood County cast their ballots from the voter registration list, does that mean 36% more registered on election day and voted? Really????? What a lesson in Democracy for North Carolina.

  8. gregflynn

    November 12, 2012 at 8:35 am

    Speaking for myself is a task I mastered at an early age. The passing years have not diminished that ability. There may come a time when people have to put food in my mouth, but no-one will ever have to put words in my mouth.

  9. david esmay

    November 13, 2012 at 10:49 am

    Frances the problem with you, is you’re blinded by your right-wing dogma, and the information you glean from Faux News and right-wing blogs is based solely on conjecture and lies.