The Future of the Voting Rights Act: Lessons from the History of School (Re-)Segregation

By Faircloth, Frances E. | The Yale Law Journal, January 2012 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

The Future of the Voting Rights Act: Lessons from the History of School (Re-)Segregation


Faircloth, Frances E., The Yale Law Journal


INTRODUCTION

On September 21, 2011, U.S. District Judge John Bates upheld the constitutionality of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in Shelby County v. Holder, issuing a 151-page opinion that exhaustively analyzed and rejected challenges to the VRA's validity. (1) Oral arguments in the D.C. Circuit are scheduled for January 2012. (2) Advocates of voting rights have applauded Judge Bates's decision as a victory for section 5, (3) which was renewed in 2006 but has been teetering on the brink of being struck down since the Supreme Court's June 2009 decision in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Holder (NAMUDNO). (4) But this applause may be premature.

As this Comment will argue, the survival of the VRA in its current form may turn out to be a defeat for the cause of voting rights. I arrive at this conclusion based on the lessons of school desegregation. After the Court allowed schools to "bail out" of mandatory desegregation by achieving "unitary status," many schools reverted to degrees of segregation that rivaled the pre-Brown v. Board of Education era. (5) If the Court allows a similar bailout option in the voting rights context, parallel regressions in voter protections could result.

I am not arguing that section 5 is unconstitutional. Nor am I taking a position on whether section 5, if it were not weakened by bailout, might be worth preserving. However, for all the good that section 5 might do in the jurisdictions where it still applies, its reach is underinclusive: states that are not (and never were) subject to section 5 are sites of growing voting rights concerns. (6) Moreover, if the Court continues to sidestep the question of section 5's validity using the canon of constitutional avoidance, we will be left with a law that is a shadow of its former self. The cause of voting rights might be better served if the Court addressed the constitutional issue head-on, even if that means possibly finding the current section 5 unconstitutional. Such an outcome could motivate Congress to present a more narrowly tailored and carefully crafted provision that would provide the needed protection and would stand up to constitutional scrutiny. (7)

I. SAVING SECTION 5?

Congress passed the Voting Rights Act in 1965 to protect the promises of the Fifteenth Amendment against the reality of widespread disenfranchisement. (8) Section 5, widely considered the key piece of the VRA, requires that certain localities "preclear" changes in voting through an administrative decision of the Department of Justice (DOJ) or a declaratory judgment from the federal district court for the District of Columbia. (9) These preclearances must establish that the change will not "deny" or "abridg[e] the right to vote on account of race or color." (10) Portions of the Act were scheduled to expire in 2007, but in 2006, following weeks of legislative hearings, Congress determined that the VRA's protective measures were still essential to fair voting and reauthorized section 5. (11)

In spite of Congress's extensive hearings, in NAMUDNO, the Supreme Court suggested that several of its members had "serious misgivings" about the constitutionality of section 5, (12) particularly in light of the "congruence and proportionality" test established in the 1997 case City of Boerne v. Flores. (13) The Court ultimately avoided the constitutional question by providing the utility district relief under the VRA's section 4 bailout provision, thus releasing NAMUDNO from the section 5 requirement. (14) But this respite for section 5 could be short-lived--Justice Thomas made it clear that he, for one, believes the law is unconstitutional. (15) And in an earlier section 5 case where Justice Thomas raised similar "constitutional concerns," Justice Kennedy indicated that those concerns could merit consideration. (16)

An abundance of commentary about how to save section 5, why to save section 5, and whether we can save section 5 followed the decision.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

The Future of the Voting Rights Act: Lessons from the History of School (Re-)Segregation
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.