Isn't it possible that VRARA comes into play immediately?  As I understand it, Section 4 of VRARA says to insert VRARA into Paragraph 8 of Section 4(a) in place of the language that says "Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1982."
 
So, after VRARA, Paragraph 8 of Section 4(a) reads:
 
"The provisions of this section shall expire at the end of the twenty-five-year period following the effective date of the amendments made by [VRARA]." 
 
This raises the question as to what is the "effective date."  I quickly scanned VRARA to see if an "effective date" was included, but couldn't find one.  Wouldn't it be possible to argue that the effective date is the date VRARA was signed into law?
 
Am I missing something?
 
If it's an open question as to when the "effective date" is, doesn't this raise an interesting question not only for purposes of a constitutional challenge but also for which substantive standards (i.e., purpose and retrogression) DOJ and the DDC should be implementing right now?
 
Best,
Mike Pitts
 
Associate Professor of Law
Indiana University School of Law -- Indianapolis
Lawrence W. Inlow Hall
530 West New York Street, Rm. 328A
Indianapolis, IN 46202
317-278-9155
mjpitts@iupui.edu

________________________________

From: owner-election-law_gl@majordomo.lls.edu on behalf of Brian Landsberg
Sent: Thu 7/27/2006 12:46 PM
To: Rick.Hasen@lls.edu
Cc: election-law@majordomo.lls.edu
Subject: Re: jurisdiction if VRA section 5 constitutionalityis challenged



Why would such a suit be ripe?  Section Five is not amended at all.  The
main operative amendment is the extension for 25 more years, but
extension is not needed until next year.  So if DOJ were, for example,
to object to a change tomorrow, even if the new Act were
unconstitutional, the objection could stand under the Act's
pre-amendment provision.

Rick Hasen <Rick.Hasen@lls.edu> 7/27/2006 9:36:38 AM >>>

I would think that it would be possible to at least bring a declaratory
judgment now, seeking to enjoin enforcement of the law as amended.

Brian Landsberg wrote: The responses to your questions have addressed
the where but not thewhen question.  Since the Act, before being
amended, did not sunsetuntil next year, wouldn't challenges have to wait
until that sun hasset?  Rick Hasen <rick.hasen@lls.edu> 7/26/2006
9:27:45 PM >>>        If someone files a lawsuit challenging the
constitutionality of the renewed section 5 (or other provision, such as
section 203), would thecase be filed before a three-judge court?  Or
would it go through a normal district court- court of appeal-cert to
Supreme Court process? Is there anything in the Act that speaks to
jurisdiction?  If there isa choice of where to file, any thinking on
where and when such achallenge would be filed? 
-- Rick HasenWilliam H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of LawLoyola Law
School919 Albany StreetLos Angeles, CA
90015-1211(213)736-1466(213)380-3769 -
faxrick.hasen@lls.eduhttp://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.htmlhttp://electionlawblog.org