Justice Department may take on N.C. over voting law changes

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder will announce today that the Justice Department is renewing enforcement of the Voting Rights Act in an effort to blunt the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby County v. Holder, the Washington Post is reporting.  That includes a possible DOJ lawsuit against North Carolina over the voting law changes pending in the General Assembly.

The decision to challenge state officials marks an aggressive effort to continue policing voting rights issues and follows a ruling by the court last month that invalidated a critical part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Justices threw out Section 5 of the landmark act, which protects minority voters by requiring certain states with a history of discrimination to be granted Justice Department or court approval before making voting law changes.

The DOJ attack will include efforts to “bail-in” jurisdictions having discriminatory voting laws, subjecting them to preclearance — as permitted under Section 3 of the Act.  The first test of that tactic will come in a pending Texas redistricting case — discussed in our story yesterday — where challengers have asked the court to consider their bail-in claim. The department will support that request and will likewise ask the judge there to require Texas to submit all voting law changes to the Justice Department for approval for a ten-year period because of its history of discrimination.

“It’s a pretty clear sign that a lawsuit against the Texas voter-ID law is also on the way,” Matthew Miller, a former Justice Department spokesman, said in the Post. Miller said Justice may also sue North Carolina if that state passes a new voter ID law.

 

4 Comments

  1. Doug

    July 25, 2013 at 11:18 pm

    Bring it on….the SCOTUS is on the right side and when it goes that far the NCGA will continue to be vindicated.

  2. Doug Gibson

    July 26, 2013 at 9:36 pm

    Dude,

    Once again, you’re delusional. You seem to think that the majority agrees with Clarence Thomas that the entire VRA needs to be repealed. He’s alone in that opinion, and even he only thinks that state legislatures have the right to impose bigoted restrictions, not that any legislature would be “vindicated” if the Supreme Court refused to strike them down.

    Actually, I’m pretty sure you don’t think that, not for one moment, but you’re prepared to say that as long as Civitas is paying you $5 a comment. Make money online!

  3. Doug

    July 29, 2013 at 1:46 pm

    Doog,
    I am not paid for this believe it or not. I make it a hobby to troll you libs gratis. It is fun to see the hysteria that results and the wacky insults in lieu of actual reasoned rebuttals.

  4. Marc

    August 2, 2013 at 8:17 am

    The Assembly thinks they’re doing something to preserve the integrity of voting; integrity is perceived. What perception of the voting system will people have when they are turned away from the polls, after waiting 1/2 hour, hour, more, because the poll is closed? Republican vote straight ticket–that’s gone. Republicans register the day they vote–that’s gone. Republicans vote early–that’s being cut. Those Republican votes don’t mean much to the GOP controlled Assembly, at least not as much as it it means to stick it to Democratic voter. Voter fraud happens at a rate of .0009% of the time, far, far, far less than school shootings and other gun violence, yet no sweeping changing has been acted on. SEC violations happen way more than voter fraud but regulation, even after the global economy nearly collapsed, is being fought like it’s the next plague. It’s more than obvious at the passage of every bill like this that this is about suppressing the Democratic vote, which most minorities vote. The fact that republicans keep hiding under the voter fraud cloak and expecting us to look the other way makes it more insulting. People like Doug don’t realize they vote for or are supporting measures that go against their own interests.