[EL] Literacy tests

Fri Aug 28 12:17:52 PDT 2020

My apologies for creating this confusion. I misinterpreted Mark's original
question, which I read to ask whether §2 was limited to ****only****
elections featuring candidates for federal office. That is clearly not the
case, but I now realize that is not what Mark was getting at. So the better
answer is "what Pam said." (And isn't that *always* the better answer?)

Doug

On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 12:52 PM Mark Scarberry <
mark.scarberry at pepperdine.edu> wrote:

> My thanks to Pam for this clarification. I was about to send the following
> post in response to Doug when hers came through.
>
> BEGINNING OF SOMEWHAT SUPERSEDED POST:
>
> Yes, the majority of the cases involve such state and local issues. That
> doesn’t mean that section 2 doesn’t apply to issues involving elections for
> federal offices. The Supreme Court has considered section 2 in connection
> with congressional redistricting schemes put in place by state
> legislatures. See the 2006 LULAC case (548 US 399); Shaw v. Reno (1993)
> (rejecting claim that use of race in that particular congressional
> redistricting was required by section two, and not suggesting that section
> 2 was inapplicable); ditto, I think, Shaw v. Hunt (1996); Bush v. Vera
> (1996) (similar, I think); see also Cooper v. Harris (2017).
>
> Maybe I’m missing something.
>
> END OF SOMEWHAT SUPERSEDED POST
>
> Mark
>
> Mark S. Scarberry
> Professor of Law
> Pepperdine University
> Rick J. Caruso School of Law
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Pamela S Karlan <pkarlan at stanford.edu>
> *Sent:* Friday, August 28, 2020 11:18:59 AM
> *To:* Doug Spencer <dougspencer at gmail.com>; Mark Scarberry <
> mark.scarberry at pepperdine.edu>
> *Cc:* Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Literacy tests
>
> Some readers might be confused by this recent exchange.  The federal
> government cannot be a *defendant* in a section 2 lawsuit, because the
> text of the statute applies only to "any State or political subdivision,"
> 52 USC 10301.  But because states and localities run the election process,
> section 2 lawsuits can involve elections to federal *office*.  E.g., the
> state decides  district lines to use for House seats.
>
> Pamela S. Karlan
>
> Kenneth and Harle Montgomery Professor of Public Interest Law
>
> Co-Director, Supreme Court Litigation Clinic
>
> Stanford Law School
>
> karlan at stanford.edu
>
> 650-725-4851
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Law-election <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> on
> behalf of Doug Spencer <dougspencer at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, August 28, 2020 10:30 AM
> *To:* Mark Scarberry <mark.scarberry at pepperdine.edu>
> *Cc:* Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Literacy tests
>
> Quite the contrary, Mark. The majority of §2 cases address election rules
> that are unrelated to federal offices. For example, here
> <https://www.justice.gov/crt/cases-raising-claims-under-section-2-voting-rights-act-0>
> is a sample of cases where the DOJ filed suit under §2: redistricting of
> state legislatures, election methods for town and county commissions,
> election methods for school boards, etc.
>
> The VRA's key fault line is race, not office.
>
> Best,
> Doug
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 10:57 AM Mark Scarberry <
> mark.scarberry at pepperdine.edu> wrote:
>
> A quick addition:
>
> State and local governments run elections. Isn’t it clear that section 2
> applies to elections for federal offices?
>
> Mark S. Scarberry
> Professor of Law
> Pepperdine University
> Rick J. Caruso School of Law
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Law-election <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> on
> behalf of Doug Spencer <dougspencer at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, August 28, 2020 9:43:07 AM
> *To:* Smith, Bradley <BSmith at law.capital.edu>
> *Cc:* Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Literacy tests
>
> A few notes following on Pam's message:
>
> The original ban on literacy tests in §4(a) of the VRA
> <https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=100&page=transcript>
> applied specifically to the "covered" states identified in §4(b). When the
> VRA was amended in 1975, the language was changed
> <https://uscode.house.gov/statviewer.htm?volume=89&page=400> to apply
> nationwide (what is now codified in §10501), meaning the ban was not
> affected when §4(b) was struck down in *Shelby County.*
>
> Supposing the Court were to invalidate §4(a) for some reason, literacy
> tests would still be subject to §2 which prohibits any "voting
> qualification or prerequisite to voting" as well as any "standard,
> practice, or procedure" that denies or abridges the right to vote on
> account of race or color.
>
> Flipping your student's query on its head, though, §2 only applies to
> state and local governments and not the federal government.
>
> Doug
>
> [image: email_signature.png]
>
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 10:19 AM Smith, Bradley <BSmith at law.capital.edu>
> wrote:
>
> Also applies nationwide.
>
> Bradley A. Smith
> Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault Professor of Law
> Capital University Law School
> 303 East Broad Street
> Columbus, OH 43215
> Phone: (614) 236-6317
> Mobile:  (540) 287-8954
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Law-election <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> on
> behalf of Ilya Shapiro <IShapiro at cato.org>
> *Sent:* Friday, August 28, 2020 12:06 PM
> *To:* Eric J Segall <esegall at gsu.edu>; Pamela S Karlan <
> pkarlan at stanford.edu>
> *Cc:* Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Literacy tests
>
>
> Doubtful. This is a permanent part of the statute rather than an
> extraordinary, “temporary” provision.
>
>
>
> Ilya Shapiro
>
> Director, Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies
>
> Publisher, *Cato Supreme Court Review*
>
> Cato Institute
>
> 1000 Massachusetts Ave. NW
>
> Washington, DC  20001
>
> tel. (202) 218-4600
>
> cel. (202) 577-1134
>
> ishapiro at cato.org
>
> Bio/clips: https://www.cato.org/people/ilya-shapiro
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.cato.org%2fpeople%2filya-shapiro&c=E,1,4tIRxpxKmjDm9iJySmkSDWeooKt_nGHX20C-P6fGEQGjxyNNUZgFDvbkUyqqFpOWrOX_P31hDTHk-r764MefM3m4rG8koTLgzGMGkGmVCHtpVekW6MeN&typo=1>
>
> Twitter: www.twitter.com/ishapiro
>
> SSRN: http://ssrn.com/author=1382023
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fssrn.com%2fauthor%3d1382023&c=E,1,u_hPEVFc64I9oeqkLbygraDadiAAUllcuaWlHlqShc7Vpkk8sjO2zKo_ydr3YSPQvaOnM1vrp_N9yuumpC6khM7-O3ozvt0s-n1XmbmNhIic&typo=1>
>
>
>
> Buy my new book: * Supreme Disorder: Judicial Nominations and the
> Politics of America’s Highest Court
> <https://www.amazon.com/Supreme-Disorder-Judicial-Nominations-Politics/dp/1684510562/>*
>
>
>
> *Cato Supreme Court Review*:  http://www.cato.org/supreme-court-review
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fwww.cato.org%2fsupreme-court-review&c=E,1,38SYIq885D6My7ewIEFB4Z7T6OUjQr_YG8Ekr1x5TYpHGrcYXYdsG0JKPcBO7epQAEEQ5gRW34ha_sFx3rU0TyzZ48gjDd0SuvjnuMBwrg,,&typo=1>
>
> Register for and watch our 19th Annual Constitution Day Conference, Sept.
> 17, 2020:
>
> https://www.cato.org/events/19th-annual-constitution-day
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.cato.org%2fevents%2f19th-annual-constitution-day&c=E,1,bFLdGwTSGUFDUIQTYppMCP34plokpynvcRud_nMICY3DrpGLlzRUXIqGjPae9mm9slN0S4SdBdmdrxMVWjqxDgVbbhfvcUKDeUQoAMNVxbjXk7A,&typo=1>
>
>
>
> *From:* Law-election <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> *On
> Behalf Of *Eric J Segall
> *Sent:* Friday, August 28, 2020 12:01 PM
> *To:* Pamela S Karlan <pkarlan at stanford.edu>
> *Cc:* Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Literacy tests
>
>
>
> *CAUTION: External Email*
>
>
>
> Irony of course is the Court could strike this down as beyond
> congressional power because the problem of literacy tests has been solved.
> Current conditions and all.....
>
>
>
> e
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2020, at 11:58 AM, Pamela S Karlan <pkarlan at stanford.edu>
> wrote:
>
>  52 U.S.C. 10501 bans literacy tests in all elections:
>
>
> 10501. Application of prohibition to other States; "test or device" defined
>
> (a) No citizen shall be denied, because of his failure to comply with any
> test or device, the right to vote in any Federal, State, or local election
> conducted in any State or political subdivision of a State.
>
> (b) As used in this section, the term "test or device" means any
> requirement that a person as a prerequisite for voting or registration for
> voting (1) demonstrate the ability to read, write, understand, or interpret
> any matter, (2) demonstrate any educational achievement or his knowledge of
> any particular subject, (3) possess good moral character, or (4) prove his
> qualifications by the voucher of registered voters or members of any other
> class.
>
>
>
> Pamela S. Karlan
>
> Kenneth and Harle Montgomery Professor of Public Interest Law
>
> Co-Director, Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic
>
> Stanford Law School
>
> 559  Nathan Abbott Way
>
> Stanford, CA 94305
>
> karlan at stanford.edu
>
> 650.725.4851
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2020, at 8:53 AM, Kogan, Vladimir <kogan.18 at osu.edu> wrote:
>
> 
>
> Hi everyone, a student asked me this question and I was embarrassed to not
> know the answer: Does the Voting Rights Act’s prohibition on literacy tests
> apply only to federal elections? In other words, could a state today
> implement a literacy tests requirement for state and local elections?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
>
>
> Vlad Kogan
>
>
>
> <image001.png>
>
>
> *Vladimir Kogan*, Associate Professor and Director of Undergraduate
> Studies
> *Department of Political Science*
>
> 2004 Derby Hall | 154 N. Oval Mall, Columbus, OH 43210-1373
>
> 510/415-4074 Mobile
>
> 614/292-9498 Office
>
> 614/292-1146
>
> http://u.osu.edu/kogan.18/
> <https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fu.osu.edu%2Fkogan.18%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cesegall%40gsu.edu%7Ce7125129c23a468d271108d84b6b2b0a%7C515ad73d8d5e4169895c9789dc742a70%7C0%7C0%7C637342270943142992&sdata=tMpISzVAe2kLbaNEDkP2fg0kBVTyGBLvt2vNSjY8oHE%3D&reserved=0>
>
> kogan.18 at osu.edu
>
> <image002.gif>
>
> @vkoganosu
> <https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fvkoganosu&data=02%7C01%7Cesegall%40gsu.edu%7Ce7125129c23a468d271108d84b6b2b0a%7C515ad73d8d5e4169895c9789dc742a70%7C0%7C0%7C637342270943152986&sdata=t%2B4Ar%2Fxf3TxG6%2BJZuS2whkVZ%2B66IcJB99eRENCcpUZI%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fdepartment-lists.uci.edu%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2flaw-election&c=E,1,zTShqRvAQsvBCdv75GyAbereK776HhjikG9CMKJpp-s2xryMh97o302snfOxQjPOR9WTjDEgsUBcLiOohbWWK9mOmkQzr26Xj46ZA__KOIqb&typo=1>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>
> https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdepartment-lists.uci.edu%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flaw-election&data=02%7C01%7Cesegall%40gsu.edu%7Ce7125129c23a468d271108d84b6b2b0a%7C515ad73d8d5e4169895c9789dc742a70%7C0%7C0%7C637342270943172987&sdata=4TyVorpbaNscf1tZcNbijLHN%2BwPnfPk%2B3lEiE3kVlmI%3D&reserved=0
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200828/9901ddad/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: email_signature.png
Type: image/png
Size: 42202 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200828/9901ddad/attachment.png>