[EL] 6/25/13 Shelby County wrap-up: news reports, columnists, advocacy organizations

Justin Levitt levittj at lls.edu
Tue Jun 25 20:47:55 PDT 2013


As you all wait for Prop 8 and DOMA ... here's a wrap-up of news 
reports, columnists, and advocacy organizations' reactions from the 
Shelby County decision today.  Apologies to anyone I've missed.  A few 
more wrap-ups coming.


    Reactions to Shelby County: domain name version
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52144>

Posted onJune 25, 2013 8:33 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52144>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

Looks like/Shelby County/has inspired at least a few new domain names to 
collect activist energies.

Among them:

  * RestoreVotingRights.org <http://restorevotingrights.org/> (calling
    on Congress to act)
  * FreeToVote.org <http://www.freetovote.org/> (calling for a
    constitutional amendment)

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52144&title=Reactions%20to%20Shelby%20County%3A%20domain%20name%20version&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> 
|Comments Off


    "The Supreme Court's Voting Rights Decision Is a Poison Chalice for
    the GOP" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52168>

Posted onJune 25, 2013 8:20 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52168>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

Interesting assessment 
<http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-06-25/the-supreme-courts-voting-rights-decision-is-a-poison-chalice-for-the-gop>from 
Joshua Green at Businessweek.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52168&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Supreme%20Court%E2%80%99s%20Voting%20Rights%20Decision%20Is%20a%20Poison%20Chalice%20for%20the%20GOP%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> 
|Comments Off


    "Minority lawmakers: Voting Rights Act ruling a huge setback"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52164>

Posted onJune 25, 2013 8:00 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52164>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

Politico canvasses 
<http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/voting-rights-act-reaction-minority-lawmakers-93342.html>some 
of the reactions.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52164&title=%E2%80%9CMinority%20lawmakers%3A%20Voting%20Rights%20Act%20ruling%20a%20huge%20setback%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> 
|Comments Off


    Department of Regrettable Tweets <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52155>

Posted onJune 25, 2013 7:38 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52155>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

 From Minnesota 
<http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/212978531.html>:

    State Rep. Ryan Winkler has deleted and apologized for using a
    racial epithet in a tweet about Tuesday's Supreme Court ruling on
    the Voting Rights Act.

    "VRA majority is four accomplices to race discrimination and one
    Uncle Thomas," Winkler tweeted about the court's 5-4 decision to
    void a key portion of the Act.

Morehere <http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/212978531.html>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52155&title=Department%20of%20Regrettable%20Tweets&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> 
|Comments Off


    Shelby County and Texas <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52147>

Posted onJune 25, 2013 7:30 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52147>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

As usual,Michael Li <http://txredistricting.org/>breaks down 
theramifications of today's decision 
<http://txredistricting.org/post/53842655437/breaking-supreme-court-strikes-down-section-5-coverage>for 
all of the continuing controversy in Texas.

One of the curiosities: Texas redrew state and federal district lines in 
2011.  A DC federal court denied preclearance for those lines (which 
included findings ofintentional discrimination 
<http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13116118305322883110>, some 
(but not all) of which was based on a distinct burden of proof for 
preclearance).  Based on that denial, a San Antonio federal court drew 
interim lines for Texas districts (state and federal) in 2012.  The 
Texas legislature has since passed maps for 2014 and beyond, based in 
large part on the interim lines, which are still heavily contested by 
the San Antonio litigants.  But the Governor has not yet signed the new 
plans.  Which means that the 2011 maps are, at the moment, legally 
operative --- despite a federal court's finding that they were enacted 
with the intent to discriminate.

Gonna be an interesting couple weeks/months/years in Texas.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52147&title=Shelby%20County%20and%20Texas&description=>
Posted inredistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,voter id 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>,Voting Rights Act 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> |Comments Off


    "A new VRA formula? Don't hold your breath."
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52117>

Posted onJune 25, 2013 3:19 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52117>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

The Fix 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/06/25/a-new-vra-map-dont-hold-your-breath/>, 
with a splash of cold water.

UPDATE: Chuck Toddagrees 
<http://www.mediaite.com/tv/chuck-todd-on-reforming-voting-rights-congress-is-not-mature-enough-to-do-this-right-now/>. 
  So doesPolitico 
<http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/voting-rights-act-congress-93331.html>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52117&title=%E2%80%9CA%20new%20VRA%20formula%3F%20Don%E2%80%99t%20hold%20your%20breath.%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> 
|Comments Off


    Reactions to Shelby County: David Gans
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52114>

Posted onJune 25, 2013 3:18 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52114>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

Echoing a discussion running as we speak on theElection Law listserv 
<http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election>, David 
Gans highlights the Court's disassociation from constitutional text, in 
thisUSA Today column 
<http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/06/25/supreme-court-justice-roberts-column/2456969/>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52114&title=Reactions%20to%20Shelby%20County%3A%20David%20Gans&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> 
|Comments Off


    Obama and Holder on Shelby County <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52098>

Posted onJune 25, 2013 12:24 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52098>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

The President 
<http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/06/25/statement-president-supreme-court-ruling-shelby-county-v-holder>:

    I am deeply disappointed with the Supreme Court's decision today.
      For nearly 50 years, the Voting Rights Act -- enacted and
    repeatedly renewed by wide bipartisan majorities in Congress -- has
    helped secure the right to vote for millions of Americans.  Today's
    decision invalidating one of its core provisions upsets decades of
    well-established practices that help make sure voting is fair,
    especially in places where voting discrimination has been
    historically prevalent.

    As a nation, we've made a great deal of progress towards
    guaranteeing every American the right to vote.  But, as the Supreme
    Court recognized, voting discrimination still exists.    And while
    today's decision is a setback, it doesn't represent the end of our
    efforts to end voting discrimination.  I am calling on Congress to
    pass legislation to ensure every American has equal access to the
    polls.  My Administration will continue to do everything in its
    power to ensure a fair and equal voting process.

The Attorney General 
<http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/ag/speeches/2013/ag-speech-130625.html>:

    Good afternoon.  Today, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its
    decision in the case of Shelby County v. Holder -- and invalidated
    an essential part of the Voting Rights Act, a cornerstone of
    American civil rights law. Like many others across the country, I am
    deeply disappointed with the Court's decision in this matter.  This
    decision represents a serious setback for voting rights -- and has
    the potential to negatively affect millions of Americans across the
    country.

    In the nearly half-century since its initial passage -- in 1965 --
    the Voting Rights Act has consistently enjoyed bipartisan support in
    Congress as well as the Executive Branch.  After extensive hearings,
    Sections 4 and 5 of this important law were reauthorized most
    recently in 2006, with the unanimous support of the U.S. Senate and
    the near-unanimous support of the House of Representatives.  This is
    a uniquely legislative function and responsibility that the
    Constitution expressly gave to Congress.    The last reauthorization
    was signed into law by President George W. Bush -- just as prior
    reauthorizations had been signed by Presidents Reagan, Ford, and
    Nixon -- in accordance with core nonpartisan American values.

More of the AG's speechhere 
<http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/ag/speeches/2013/ag-speech-130625.html>.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52098&title=Obama%20and%20Holder%20on%20Shelby%20County&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> 
|Comments Off


    Lots of good analysis of Shelby County
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52096>

Posted onJune 25, 2013 12:21 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52096>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

over at theNY Times 
<http://projects.nytimes.com/live-dashboard/2013-06-25-supreme-court>site. 
  Analysis of the decision, (to some extent) its ramifications, and (to 
some extent) potential avenues for Congress in the aftermath.

Includes, among other goodies:

  * Four Questions for Chandler Davidson
  * Four Questions for John Neiman (Alabama SG)
  * Four Questions for Ellen D. Katz
  * Four Questions for Ilya Shapiro
  * Four Questions for Spencer Overton
  * Four Questions for Deborah N. Archer
  * Obama and Holder 'Deeply Disappointed' in Decision
  * Civil Rights Groups Condemn Ruling and Map Next Steps
  * A Current Look at the Black Electorate
  * Texas to Move Quickly on Voter Laws and Maps
  * Congressional Democrats Not Optimistic About Remedy
  * Americans Split on Voting Rights Act
  * Voting Rights Act Q. and A. (Adam Liptak)

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52096&title=Lots%20of%20good%20analysis%20of%20Shelby%20County&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> 
|Comments Off


    "Photo ID now required for voting in Texas"
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52094>

Posted onJune 25, 2013 12:19 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52094>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

 From the TexasSecretary of State 
<http://www.sos.state.tx.us/about/newsreleases/2013/062513.shtml>:

    Texas Secretary of State John Steen today announced that photo
    identification will now be required when voting in Texas elections.
    His announcement follows a decision Tuesday by the U.S. Supreme
    Court that cleared the way for photo ID requirements in Texas,
    originally passed by the Texas Legislature in 2011, to take effect.

Morehere <http://www.sos.state.tx.us/about/newsreleases/2013/062513.shtml>.

That didn't take long.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52094&title=%E2%80%9CPhoto%20ID%20now%20required%20for%20voting%20in%20Texas%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,voter id 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9>,Voting Rights Act 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> |Comments Off


    Shelby County reactions: advocacy edition
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52081>

Posted onJune 25, 2013 12:06 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52081>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

And here's a roundup of some reactions to the decision from nonprofit 
groups so far...

NAACP LDF 
<http://www.naacpldf.org/update/supreme-court-ruling-voting-rights-opens-door-wave-minority-voter-suppression>
NAACP <http://www.naacp.org/page/s/vra-no-voting-rights>
MALDEF
<http://www.maldef.org/news/releases/supreme_court_decision_pulling_back_on_voting_rights/>NALEO 
Educational Fund 
<http://us1.campaign-archive2.com/?u=c1a51befb8159efb3bbd1f2620f9e1&id=b1439b54c3&e=pFVkkge0zQ>
AALDEF and AAJC
<http://www.advancingjustice-aajc.org/news-media/news/asian-american-groups-dismayed-supreme-court-decision-gut-voting-rights-act>Leadership 
Conference on Civil and Human Rights 
<http://www.civilrights.org/press/2013/VRA-Supreme-Court-Decision-Response.html>
<http://www.advancingjustice-aajc.org/news-media/news/asian-american-groups-dismayed-supreme-court-decision-gut-voting-rights-act>Color 
of Change <http://www.freetovote.org/>
<http://www.advancingjustice-aajc.org/news-media/news/asian-american-groups-dismayed-supreme-court-decision-gut-voting-rights-act>Lawyers' 
Committee for Civil Rights 
<http://www.lawyerscommittee.org/newsroom/press_releases?id=0322>
<http://www.advancingjustice-aajc.org/news-media/news/asian-american-groups-dismayed-supreme-court-decision-gut-voting-rights-act>Advancement 
Project 
<http://www.advancementproject.org/news/entry/scotus-removes-critical-protection-for-voters-of-color>
ACLU
<http://www.aclu.org/voting-rights/supreme-court-strikes-down-current-coverage-formula-voting-rights-act>AFSCME 
<http://www.afscme.org/news/press-room/press-releases/2013/afscme-pres-lee-saunders-on-the-supreme-court-decision-to-gut-the-voting-rights-act>
<http://www.aclu.org/voting-rights/supreme-court-strikes-down-current-coverage-formula-voting-rights-act>Brennan 
Center for Justice 
<http://www.brennancenter.org/press-release/section-5-stands-now-congress-must-strengthen-voting-rights-act> (andWendy 
Weiser 
<http://www.brennancenter.org/blog/sad-day-democracy-tomorrow-need-not-be>'s 
related blog entry)
<http://www.brennancenter.org/press-release/section-5-stands-now-congress-must-strengthen-voting-rights-act>Campaign 
Legal Center 
<http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2170:june-25-2013-supreme-court-shelby-county-v-holder-decision-statement-of-j-gerald-hebert&catid=63:legal-center-press-releases&Itemid=61>
Common Cause
<http://www.commoncause.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4773613&ct=13186773>Constitutional 
Accountability Center
<http://theusconstitution.org/media/releases/cac-reacts-supreme-court-opinion-striking-down-part-iconic-voting-rights-act>Demos
<http://www.demos.org/press-release/high-courts-decision-striking-down-key-provision-voting-rights-act-1965-cannot-stand>FairVote 
<http://www.fairvote.org/announcement-what-comes-now-for-the-right-to-vote>
<http://www.demos.org/press-release/high-courts-decision-striking-down-key-provision-voting-rights-act-1965-cannot-stand>Project 
Vote 
<http://www.projectvote.org/blog/2013/06/voting-rights-act-ruling-a-setback-for-our-great-democracy/>
True the Vote 
<http://www.truethevote.org/news/true-the-vote-statement-regarding-the-u-s-supreme-court-s-voting-rights-act-decision> (linked 
to PJ Media 
<http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2013/06/25/supreme-court-buries-section-5-of-voting-rights-act/>)

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52081&title=Shelby%20County%20reactions%3A%20advocacy%20edition&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> 
|Comments Off


    Shelby County Coverage So Far <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=51997>

Posted onJune 25, 2013 9:03 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=51997>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

SCOTUSblog <http://www.scotusblog.com/?p=165872>(andhere 
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/shelby-county-v-holder/>)
AP
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/high-court-voids-key-part-voting-rights-act>Reuters
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/25/us-usa-court-voting-idUSBRE95O0TU20130625>NPR (Nina 
Totenberg 
<http://www.npr.org/2013/06/25/195599353/supreme-court-up-to-congress-to-fix-voting-rights-act>andMichele 
Martin <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=195533027>)
USA Today 
<http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/25/supreme-court-shelby-voting-rights-alabama-congress-race/2116491/>
NY Times 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.html?hp&_r=0>(andhere 
<http://projects.nytimes.com/live-dashboard/2013-06-25-supreme-court>)
Washington Post 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-stops-use-of-key-part-of-voting-rights-act/2013/06/25/26888528-dda5-11e2-b197-f248b21f94c4_story.html> (and 
The Fix,here 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/06/25/a-new-vra-map-dont-hold-your-breath/> andhere 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/06/25/what-the-voting-rights-act-decision-means-for-politics/>)
Wall St. Journal
<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323469804578521363840962032.html?mod=WSJ_Home_largeHeadline>McClatchy 
(Miami Herald 
<http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/06/25/3469434/supreme-court-strikes-down-key.html>)
<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323469804578521363840962032.html?mod=WSJ_Home_largeHeadline>LA 
Times
<http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-supreme-court-voting-rights-ruling-20130625,0,3553912.story>Houston 
Chronicle 
<http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2013/06/supreme-court-strikes-down-key-provision-of-voting-rights-act-narrows-its-scope/>
Atlanta Journal-Constitution 
<http://www.ajc.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/supreme-court-throws-out-voting-rights-act-preclea/nYTj6/>
CNN 
<http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/25/politics/scotus-voting-rights/index.html?hpt=hp_t1>
Bloomberg 
<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-25/voting-rights-act-provision-struck-down-by-u-s-supreme-court.html> (andBusinessweek 
<http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-06-25/supreme-court-ends-era-of-the-voting-rights-act>)
Politico
<http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/supreme-court-voting-rights-act-ruling-93324.html?hp=t1>National 
Journal 
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/supreme-court-shreds-key-provision-of-the-voting-rights-act-20130625>
The Hill 
<http://thehill.com/homenews/news/307581-supreme-court-rules-against-voting-rights-act>
Roll Call
<http://atr.rollcall.com/supreme-court-strikes-key-voting-rights-law/>Campaigns 
& Elections 
<http://www.campaignsandelections.com/campaign-insider/375742/what-does-the-vra-ruling-mean-for-campaigns-.thtml>
<http://atr.rollcall.com/supreme-court-strikes-key-voting-rights-law/>Salon 
<http://www.salon.com/2013/06/25/scotus_strikes_down_part_of_the_voting_rights_act/singleton/>
<http://atr.rollcall.com/supreme-court-strikes-key-voting-rights-law/>The Atlantic 
<http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/06/on-voting-rights-a-decision-as-lamentable-as-plessy-or-dred-scott/276455/>
<http://atr.rollcall.com/supreme-court-strikes-key-voting-rights-law/>The Nation 
<http://www.thenation.com/blog/174968/scotus-voting-rights-act-decision-means-we-need-amend-constitution#axzz2XFC95A6N> (andhere, 
from Ari Berman 
<http://www.thenation.com/blog/174973/what-supreme-court-doesnt-understand-about-voting-rights-act>)

And with a little preview, I was on theTavis Smiley 
<http://www.pbs.org/wnet/tavissmiley/>show (with Kimberlé Williams 
Crenshaw) last night, discussing the Monday opinions and laying the 
ground for /Shelby County/.  At that point, I was still optimistic.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D51997&title=Shelby%20County%20Coverage%20So%20Far&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> 
|Comments Off


    BREAKING NEWS: Section 4 of VRA struck down
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52059>

Posted onJune 25, 2013 7:10 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52059>byJustin Levitt 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>

The wait is over.  SCOTUSblog reports that section 4 of the VRA has been 
struck down --- the formula for determining preclearance coverage.  The 
Chief Justice wrote the opinion, with Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, 
Sotomayor, and Kagan in dissent.

UPDATE: The opinion ishere 
<http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-96_6k47.pdf>.  I'll be 
tracking commentary throughout the day.

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52059&title=BREAKING%20NEWS%3A%20Section%204%20of%20VRA%20struck%20down&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,redistricting 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>,Uncategorized 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>,voter registration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>,Voting Rights Act 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> |Comments Off

-- 
Justin Levitt
Associate Professor of Law
Loyola Law School | Los Angeles
919 Albany St.
Los Angeles, CA  90015
213-736-7417
justin.levitt at lls.edu
ssrn.com/author=698321

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130625/a55badbf/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130625/a55badbf/attachment.png>


View list directory