Statement of Doug Kendall, President of Constitutional Accountability Center, on Today’s Supreme Court Voting Rights Case

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 29, 2009
CONTACT: Doug Kendall, 202 296-6889, x3
Elizabeth Wydra, 202 296-6889, x6

Today’s argument was shockingly devoid of any real consideration of the Supreme Court’s proper role in reviewing legislation passed by Congress to enforce the right to vote.

Instead, some of the justices combed the 15,000-page record assembled by Congress in support of the Voting Rights Act of 2006 for minute flaws, showing a willingness to second-guess Congress that sharply departs from the text and history of the Constitution. As demonstrated by Constitutional Accountability Center’s brief in this case, the text and history of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments demand that the Court give broad discretion to Congress in determining what laws are “appropriate” to secure the right to vote free from discrimination. Here, Congress held 21 hearings, interviewed more than 90 witnesses, and found that jurisdictions required to pre-clear had engaged in thousands of discriminatory electoral practices between 1982 and 2006. This evidence is more than sufficient to support Congress’ extension of the Voting Rights Act. Under the standard of deference required by the Constitution, the Court should resoundingly affirm the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act.

Read CAC’s brief

Read analysis from Text & History

###

Constitutional Accountability Center (CAC) is a think tank, law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of our Constitution’s text and history. CAC filed a brief in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder in favor of appellees, which is available on our website, www.theusconstitution.org
 

More from

Rule of Law
July 25, 2024

USA: ‘The framers of the constitution envisioned an accountable president, not a king above the law’

CIVICUS
CIVICUS discusses the recent US Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity and its potential impact...
By: Praveen Fernandes
Access to Justice
July 23, 2024

Bissonnette and the Future of Federal Arbitration

The Regulatory Review
Every year, there are a handful of Supreme Court cases that do not make headlines...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen
Rule of Law
July 19, 2024

US Supreme Court is making it harder to sue – even for conservatives

Reuters
July 19 (Reuters) - Over its past two terms, the U.S. Supreme Court has put an end...
By: David H. Gans, Andrew Chung
Rule of Law
July 18, 2024

RELEASE: Sixth Circuit Panel Grapples with Effect of Supreme Court’s Loper Bright Decision on Title X Regulation

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen
Rule of Law
July 17, 2024

Family Planning Fight Poised to Test Scope of Chevron Rollback

Bloomberg Law
Justices made clear prior Chevron-based decisions would stand Interpretations of ambiguous laws no longer given deference...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen, Mary Anne Pazanowski
Rule of Law
July 15, 2024

Not Above the Law Coalition On Judge Cannon Inappropriately Dismissing Classified Documents Case Against Trump

WASHINGTON — Today, following reports that Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the classified documents case against...
By: Praveen Fernandes