SCOTUS to rule on voting rights law

[octoberlib]

http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/11/court-to-rule-on-voting-rights-law-2/#.UJ1vGgqdlHA.twitter

Acting three days after the nation’s minority voters showed that they have increased and still growing power in U.S. elections, the Supreme Court agreed on Friday to rule on a challenge to Congress’s power to protect those groups’ rights at the polls. The Court said it would hear claims that Congress went beyond its authority when it extended for another twenty-five years the nation’s most important civil rights law, the Voting Rights Act, originally passed in 1965 and renewed four times since then.

Specially at issue is the constitutionality of the law’s Section 5, the most important provision, under which nine states and parts of seven others with a past history of racial bias in voting must get official clearance in Washington before they may put into effect any change in election laws or procedures, no matter how small. The Court came close to striking down that section three years ago, but instead sent Congress clear signals that it should update the law so that it reflects more recent conditions, especially in the South. Congress did nothing in reaction.

Let's see what Scalia and his henchman do with this.

[socialindependocrat]

1. After all the crap this year - doesn't that justify Section 5?

"under which nine states and parts of seven others with a past history of racial bias in voting "

and

"should update the law so that it reflects more recent conditions, especially in the South"

What about Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida, etc. aren't they the more recent conditions?

[Drale]

2. I think all the crap this election

justifies expanding Section five to include all States, even blue states because anything can happen and a blue state could go red in the far future.

[socialindependocrat]

3. Yes, totally agree that the rules should apply to all states

I also, like the idea of not allowing changes to voting machines
and rules within a period that is too short to review the changes
and protect the rights of individuals.

Someone reminded me that some beneficial changes may come
to light, which I think is valid. The point is to protect the process
from being damaged like all this voter suppression and the
efforts (the continuing efforts) by the Ohio SOS to try to mess
with the system.

It will be interesting to see if SCOTUS makes another obviously
"bought"decision on this one...