LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

LETTERS/COLUMNS: SEND LETTERS TO THE EDITOR FOR PUBLISHING TO FRONTPAGENEWS1@YAHOO.COM. PLEASE INCLUDE DAY/EVENING/ CELL NUMBER, HOME NUMBER, AND EMAIL. CONTACT VAN STONE: FRONTPAGENEWS1@YAHOO.COM OR (215) 821-9147 TO SUBMIT A REQUEST FOR ANY WRITER. PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE WRITER DIRECTLY! ALL APPEARANCE REQUEST WILL GO THROUGH THE MANAGING EDITOR'S OFFICE. COPYRIGHT: THE USE OF ANY SUBMISSIONS APPEARING ON THIS SITE FOR MONETARY GAINS IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. TO LEARN MORE: PHILADELPHIA FRONT PAGE NEWS WWW.FPNNEWS.ORG. YOUR TOP STORIES OF THE DAY (215) 821-9147.

Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Supreme Court halts use of key part of voting law

Supreme Court halts use of key part of voting law 

AP Photo
Ryan P. Haygood, director of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, talks outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Tuesday, June 25, 2013, about the Shelby County v. Holder, a voting rights case in Alabama. Charles White, the national field director for the NAACP is second from right and Sherrilyn Ifill, president of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund is at right. The Supreme Court says a key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act cannot be enforced until Congress comes up with a new way of determining which states and localities require close federal monitoring of elections.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A deeply divided Supreme Court threw out the most powerful part of the landmark Voting Rights Act on Tuesday, a decision deplored by the White House but cheered by mostly Southern states now free from nearly 50 years of intense federal oversight of their elections.


Split along ideological and partisan lines, the justices voted 5-4 to strip the government of its most potent tool to stop voting bias - the requirement in the Voting Rights Act that all or parts of 15 states with a history of discrimination in voting, mainly in the South, get Washington's approval before changing the way they hold elections.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for a majority of conservative, Republican-appointed justices, said the law's provision that determines which states are covered is unconstitutional because it relies on 40-year-old data and does not account for racial progress and other changes in U.S. society.

The decision effectively puts an end to the advance approval requirement that has been used to open up polling places to minority voters in the nearly half century since it was first enacted in 1965, unless Congress can come up with a new formula that Roberts said meets "current conditions" in the United States. That seems unlikely to happen any time soon.

President Barack Obama, the nation's first black chief executive, issued a statement saying he was "deeply disappointed" with the ruling and calling on Congress to update the law.

But in the South, Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley said that, while the requirement was necessary in the 1960s, that was no longer the case. He said, "We have long lived up to what happened then, and we have made sure it's not going to happen again."

The advance approval, or preclearance, requirement shifted the legal burden and required governments that were covered to demonstrate that their proposed election changes would not discriminate.

Going forward, the outcome alters the calculus of passing election-related legislation in the affected states and local jurisdictions. The threat of an objection from Washington has hung over such proposals for nearly a half century. Unless Congress acts, that deterrent now is gone.

That prospect has upset civil rights groups which especially worry that changes on the local level might not get the same scrutiny as the actions of state legislatures.

Tuesday's decision means that a host of state and local laws that have not received Justice Department approval or have not yet been submitted can take effect. Prominent among those are voter identification laws in Alabama and Mississippi.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican, said his state's voter ID law, which a panel of federal judges blocked as discriminatory, also would be allowed to take effect.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, dissenting from the ruling along with the court's three other liberal, Democratic appointees, said there was no mistaking the court's action.

"Hubris is a fit word for today's demolition" of the law, she said.

Reaction to the ruling from elected officials generally divided along partisan lines.

Mississippi Lt. Gov. Tate Reeves, a Republican, said in a news release, "The practice of preclearance unfairly applied to certain states should be eliminated in recognition of the progress Mississippi has made over the past 48 years."

But Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson, the only black lawmaker in Mississippi's congressional delegation, said the ruling "guts the most critical portion of the most important civil rights legislation of our time."
Alabama Gov. Bentley, a Republican, pointed to his state's legislature - 27 percent black, similar to Alabama's overall population - as a sign of the state's progress.

The court challenge came from Shelby County, Ala., a Birmingham suburb.

The prior approval requirement had applied to the states of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia. It also covered certain counties in California, Florida, New York, North Carolina and South Dakota, and some local jurisdictions in Michigan. Coverage was triggered by past discrimination not only against blacks, but also against American Indians, Asian-Americans, Alaska Natives and Hispanics.

Obama, whose historic election was a subtext in the court's consideration of the case, pledged that his administration would continue to fight discrimination in voting. "While today's decision is a setback, it doesn't represent the end of our efforts to end voting discrimination," the president said. "I am calling on Congress to pass legislation to ensure every American has equal access to the polls."

Congress essentially ignored the court's threat to upend the voting rights law in a similar case four years ago. 

Roberts said the "failure to act leaves us today with no choice."

Congressional Democrats said they are eager to make changes, but Republicans were largely noncommittal.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said he expects Republicans to block efforts to revive the law, even though a Republican-led Congress overwhelmingly approved its latest renewal in 2006 and President George W. Bush signed it into law.

"As long as Republicans have a majority in the House and Democrats don't have 60 votes in the Senate, there will be no preclearance. It is confounding that after decades of progress on voting rights, which have become part of the American fabric, the Supreme Court would tear it asunder," Schumer said.

Attorney General Eric Holder said the Justice Department "will not hesitate to take swift enforcement action, using every legal tool that remains available to us, against any jurisdiction that seeks to take advantage of the Supreme Court's ruling by hindering eligible citizens' full and free exercise of the franchise."

Those federal tools include other permanent provisions of the Voting Rights Act that prohibit discrimination and apply nationwide. But they place the burden of proof on the government and can be used only one case at a time.

The Obama administration and civil rights groups said there is a continuing need for the federal law and pointed to the Justice Department's efforts to block voter ID laws in South Carolina and Texas last year, as well as a redistricting plan in Texas that a federal court found discriminated against the state's large and growing Hispanic population.

The justices all agreed that discrimination in voting still exists.

But Roberts said that the covered states have largely eradicated the problems that caused them to be included in the first place.

"The coverage formula that Congress reauthorized in 2006 ignores these developments, keeping the focus on decades-old data relevant to decades-old problems, rather than current data reflecting current needs," the chief justice said.

Ginsburg countered that Congress had found that the prior approval provision was necessary "to prevent a return to old ways."

Instead, "the court today terminates the remedy that proved to be best suited to block that discrimination," she said in a dissent that she read aloud in the packed courtroom.

Ginsburg said the law continues to be necessary to protect against what she called subtler, "second-generation" barriers to voting. She identified one such effort as the switch to at-large voting from a district-by-district approach in a city with a sizable black minority. The at-large system allows the majority to "control the election of each city council member, effectively eliminating the potency of the minority's votes," she said.

Justice Clarence Thomas was part of the majority, but wrote separately to say anew that he would have struck down the advance approval requirement itself.

Civil rights lawyers condemned the ruling.

"The Supreme Court has effectively gutted one of the nation's most important and effective civil rights laws. Minority voters in places with a record of discrimination are now at greater risk of being disenfranchised than they have been in decades," said Jon Greenbaum, chief counsel for the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

The decision comes five months after Obama started his second term in the White House, re-elected by a diverse coalition of voters.

The high court is in the midst of a broad re-examination of the ongoing necessity of laws and programs aimed at giving racial minorities access to major areas of American life from which they once were excluded. The justices issued a modest ruling Monday that preserved affirmative action in higher education and will take on cases dealing with anti-discrimination sections of a federal housing law and another affirmative action case from Michigan next term.

The Alabama county's lawsuit acknowledged that the measure's strong medicine was appropriate and necessary to counteract decades of state-sponsored discrimination in voting, despite the Fifteenth Amendment's guarantee of the vote for black Americans.

But it asked whether there was any end in sight for a provision that intrudes on states' rights to conduct elections and was considered an emergency response when first enacted in 1965.

The county noted that the 25-year extension approved in 2006 would keep some places under Washington's oversight until 2031. And, the county said, it seemed not to account for changes that include the elimination of racial disparity in voter registration and turnout or the existence of allegations of race-based discrimination in voting in areas of the country that are not subject to the provision.



Van Stone Productions Inc. 501C3 Nonprofit Organization Informatioin (EIN) / Tax ID

Van Stone Productions Inc. 501C3 Nonprofit Organization Informatioin (EIN) / Tax ID
Click on the logo to learn about the non-profit status

BECOME OUR VLOGGER OF THE MONTH: VIDEO NEWS CONTENT PUBLISHED ON ANY TOPIC BELOW

Latest edition of Talk Live Philly With Van Stone

VAN STONE PERFORMANCE PROMOTION VIDEO AT WEST PHILADELPHIA HS 1999 - BELOW

FPN NEWS “TAKE TIME FOR WINNERS IN ANY COMMUNITY!”

Van Stones' Beautiful World Images -Latinamerica, South Asia, and USA Fashion and Beauty Collection

Van Stones' Beautiful World Images -Latinamerica, South Asia, and USA Fashion and Beauty Collection
Family Modeling -modelado de la familia

Van Stones' Beautiful World Images -Hermosas World Images Van Stones

Van Stones' Beautiful World Images -Hermosas World Images Van Stones
Family Modeling -modelado de la familia

WE'RE #1

WE'RE #1

Van Stones' Beautiful World Images -Hermosas World Images Van Stones

Van Stones' Beautiful World Images -Hermosas World Images Van Stones
Family Modeling -modelado de la familia

Van Stones' Beautiful Tween Images-Hermosas Imágenes Tween Van Stones

Van Stones' Beautiful Tween Images-Hermosas Imágenes Tween Van Stones
Family Modeling -modelado de la familia

WE'RE NO 1

WE'RE NO 1

Van Stones' Beautiful Youth Images -Van Stones imágenes hermosas de la Juventud

Van Stones' Beautiful Youth Images -Van Stones imágenes hermosas de la Juventud
Family Modeling -Modelado de la familia

WE'RE NO 1

WE'RE NO 1

Van Stones' Beautiful Child Images -Van Stones Niño hermoso Imágenes

WE'RE #1

Van Stones’ Beautiful Children Images - Van Stones imágenes hermosas Madre

Van Stones’ Beautiful Children Images - Van Stones imágenes hermosas Madre
Family Modeling -modelado de la familia

Like Us On Facebook

We"re Looking For Volunteers

News, and more about youth, education, political analyst, schools, anti-violence, social justice, grass roots democracy, ecological protection, seniors, Historic Preservation & Restoration, (Black, Latinos, Asian, Pakistani, Italian, and other)Arts, Books, Super Heroes, Trading Cards, Youth, College, and Pro Sports, Nonprofits and Real-estate.

Blog Archive

About Us

  • FPN can reach out to Representatives from your side of: The Village, The Township, or The City
  • FPN features
    Sports
    Cars
    Family Entertainment
    Neighborhood News
    Scholastic News
    Regional News
    National News
    Citywide News
    Legal News
    Alternative Green Energy Education News
    Superhero & Comic Strip News
  • Teen Stars
  • Humanitarian/Ministers/Political
  • Community Services
  • Women & Men & Kids

  • You acknowledge and agree that you may not copy, distribute, sell, resell or exploit for any commercial purposes, any portion of the Newspaper or Services. Unless otherwise expressly provided in our Newspaper, you may not copy, display or use any trademark without prior written permission of the trademark owner.

    FPN/VSP® is in no way responsible for the content of any site owned by a third party that may be listed on our Website and/or linked to our Website via hyperlink. VSP/FPN® makes no judgment or warranty with respect to the accuracy, timeliness or suitability of the content of any site to which the Website may refer and/or link, and FPN/VSP® takes no responsibility therefor. By providing access to other websites, FPN/VSP® is not endorsing the goods or services provided by any such websites or their sponsoring organizations, nor does such reference or link mean that any third party websites or their owners are endorsing FPN/VSP® or any of the Services. Such references and links are for informational purposes only and as a convenience to you.

    FPN/VSP® reserves the right at any time to modify or discontinue, temporarily or permanently, the Website and/or Services (or any part thereof) with or without notice to you. You agree that neither FPN/VSP® nor its affiliates shall be liable to you or to any third party for any modification, suspension or discontinuance of the Website and/or Services.

    You agree to indemnify and hold harmless FPN/VSP®, its subsidiaries, and affiliates, and their respective officers, directors, employees, shareholders, legal representatives, agents, successors and assigns, from and against any and all claims, actions, demands, causes of action and other proceedings arising from or concerning your use of the Services (collectively, "Claims") and to reimburse them on demand for any losses, costs, judgments, fees, fines and other expenses they incur (including attorneys' fees and litigation costs) as a result of any Claims.

    The Website is © 2009 by VSP®, or its designers. All rights reserved. Your rights with respect to use of the Website and Services are governed by the Terms and all applicable laws, including but not limited to intellectual property laws.

    Any contact information for troops overseas and/or soldiers at home provided to you by FPN/VSP® is specifically and solely for your individual use in connection with the services provide by Van Stone Productions Foundation VSP.

    FPN/VSP® soldiers contact information for any other purpose whatsoever, including, but not limited to, copying and/or storing by any means (manually, electronically, mechanically, or otherwise) not expressly authorized by FPN/VSP is strictly prohibited. Additionally, use of FPN/VSP® contact information for any solicitation or recruiting purpose, or any other private, commercial, political, or religious mailing, or any other form of communication not expressly authorized by FPN/VSP® is strictly prohibited.