Comments on: What of congressional power over voting? http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/02/12/what-of-congressional-power-over-voting/ Fri, 24 May 2013 16:11:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: RogerClegg http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/02/12/what-of-congressional-power-over-voting/comment-page-1/#comment-70745 RogerClegg Tue, 12 Feb 2013 18:47:13 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=17910#comment-70745 There are particular problems with Section 5, so the Court striking it down would not have the cataclysmic ramifications that the piece here claims. Here's why Section 5 is bad policy, outdated, unconstitutional, and ought to be struck down by the Supreme Court: http://www.pacificlegal.org/opeds/Overturn-unconstitutional-Voting-Rights-Act What’s especially ironic is that the principal use to which Section 5 is put today is forcing jurisdictions to create and maintain racially segregated and gerrymandered voting districts – which is completely at odds with the original ideals of the Civil Rights Movement. There are other federal laws available to protect the rights of voters, and they don't raise the problems that Section 5 does. There are particular problems with Section 5, so the Court striking it down would not have the cataclysmic ramifications that the piece here claims. Here’s why Section 5 is bad policy, outdated, unconstitutional, and ought to be struck down by the Supreme Court: http://www.pacificlegal.org/opeds/Overtu rn-unconstitutional-Voting-Rights-Act

What’s especially ironic is that the principal use to which Section 5 is put today is forcing jurisdictions to create and maintain racially segregated and gerrymandered voting districts – which is completely at odds with the original ideals of the Civil Rights Movement.

There are other federal laws available to protect the rights of voters, and they don’t raise the problems that Section 5 does.

]]>