The Supreme Court recently ruled against Alabama Republicans, requiring the state to redraw congressional districts in support of greater representation of Black voters. This ruling shocked civil and voting rights activists, including me, as we expected the conservative Roberts Court to further disenfranchise voters of color.
If the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Alabama Republicans, they would have gutted the last protections of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), the landmark civil rights law from the 1960s. The Roberts Court already invalidated a central part of the law in 2013, which required states with a history of discrimination to obtain "preclearance" from the federal Justice Department before making any changes in their voting laws. If the Republicans won this most recent case, the Court would have invalidated the last remaining recourse against disenfranchisement for voters of color, which made it illegal to dilute representation of racial groups.
Instead, Chief Justice Roberts joined with Justice Brett Kavanaugh and the Court's liberal members to protect the one last tool for civil rights that the VRA gave us. The justices reaffirmed race as something that requires protection.
The Roberts Court essentially confirmed what we all already know: That we are not in a post-racial society. Racism is still alive and well. Those who have power will use it to hold back those without power, and in this country, power and race are so closely aligned that they are basically the same thing.
In her dissent in the 2013 case, former Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg made an analogy to show why the protections from the VRA are still needed: "[T]hrowing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet."
Justice Ginsburg was proven correct soon after the 2013 decision. Within 24 hours, Texas, which previously would have had to get approval from the Justice Department for any changes in their voting laws, announced they would begin implementing a strict voter ID law, which made it harder for people of color to vote. The Brennan Center for Justice found that "states previously covered by the preclearance requirement have engaged in significant efforts to disenfranchise voters" since the requirement went away.
If the Roberts Court further weakened the VRA this time around, we would have seen the same thing. There are about 30 cases right now involving Section 2 of the VRA, which was the portion of the law in front of the Supreme Court. Almost all of these are in the South, the same states that have a history of discriminatory voting laws.
Luckily for those of us who care about freedom and our country's founding ethos of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, these cases will be buttressed by the Supreme Court's decision. This will lead to the redrawing of racially discriminatory maps across the American South. With the balance of power realigned in Congress, state legislatures, and state supreme courts, we might have a real chance to defeat discriminatory laws seeking to reduce the rights of the LGBTQ+ community, limit the teaching of inclusive American history, and attack reproductive liberty.
The Supreme Court's decision, surprising as it is, shows that even the most conservative actors understand the need for voting rights protections, and that they see the disenfranchisement of Black voters as the attack on our democracy that it is.
We are living in an echo of the civil rights movement of the 1960s. This is a different time, but the issues are still the same. As the marginalized seek out greater representation and equal rights, those in power will push back and try to keep them down. This is happening not just for voters of color but also for women's reproductive rights, transgender rights, and queer rights.
Just like in the 1960s, Congress needs to recognize this conservative backlash to an expansion of rights as a threat to our democracy. A good place to start? Passing the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, which would reinstate the preclearance provisions that were struck down by the Court in 2013. This will help expand freedom and self-determination, rather than limiting it.
If the Supreme Court understands this, Congress should too.
Alanah Odoms is the executive director of ACLU of Louisiana.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Uncommon Knowledge
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
