Concerned about today's Supreme Court decision, essentially gutting the landmark Voting Rights Act? Perhaps you are just looking at it the wrong way, or so one National Review columnist would have you believe.
Concerned about today’s Supreme Court decision, essentially gutting the landmark Voting Rights Act? Perhaps you are just looking at it the wrong way, or so one National Review columnist would have you believe.
In what can best be described as a trolling for the ages, outspoken voter ID advocate John Fund argues that the court’s 5-4 decision was in fact “a victory for civil rights.” He goes on to explain:
Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act forced states that had poor minority registration or turnout numbers in the 1960s to remain in a permanent penalty box from which they were forced to seek Justice Department approval for the most basic of election-law decisions.
How exactly then is this decision a victory for civil rights? That part is not so clear. Is the implication that the Justice Department has somehow been thwarting covered jurisdictions’ earnest attempts to ensure equal voting rights? Can we now, finally, declare racism to be over?
And besides, he argues, it’s not like the court struck down the whole thing! After all, “Congress is free to come up with a different, updated coverage formula for pre-clearance,” though he acknowledges that Congressional action appears “unlikely” anytime soon.
(h/t TPM)
