90.9 WBUR - Boston's NPR news station
Top Stories:
PLEDGE NOW

Supreme Court Strikes Down Voting Rights Act Provisions

Ryan P. Haygood, director of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, talks outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Tuesday, June 25, 2013, about the Shelby County v. Holder, a voting rights case in Alabama. Charles White, the national field director for the NAACP is second from right and Sherrilyn Ifill, president of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund is at right. The Supreme Court says a key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act cannot be enforced until Congress comes up with a new way of determining which states and localities require close federal monitoring of elections. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)

Ryan P. Haygood, director of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, talks outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Tuesday, June 25, 2013, about the Shelby County v. Holder, a voting rights case in Alabama. Charles White, the national field director for the NAACP is second from right and Sherrilyn Ifill, president of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund is at right. The Supreme Court says a key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act cannot be enforced until Congress comes up with a new way of determining which states and localities require close federal monitoring of elections. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)

In a 5-4 decision, the justices invalidated a key section of the Voting Rights Act, effectively striking down federal oversight of voting laws in nine states.

Guests

Lani Guinier, Bennett Boskey Professor of Law, Harvard Law School.

More

New York Times “Chief Justice Roberts said that Congress remained free to try to impose federal oversight on states where voting rights were at risk, but must do so based on contemporary data. When the law was last renewed, in 2006, Congress relied on data from decades before. The chances that the current Congress could reach agreement on where federal oversight is required are small, most analysts say.”


Other stories from this show:

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on this site.
  • Anonymous

    This is a highly troubling decision by the Roberts Court. It’s essentially imploring Congress to legislate a matter which it already has periodically over the course of the past few decades, since the initial enactment of the Voting Right Act. For a judicial body to question the methodology, accuracy and sufficiency of the data collected for renewing such legislation is an encroachment into the separate function of the legislative branch that not only blurs but outrightly violates the principle of the separation of powers embedded in our Constitution. This is sanctioned disenfranchisement worthy of Jim Crow-style congratulations! 

Hosts Meghna Chakrabarti and Anthony Brooks introduce us to newsmakers, big thinkers and artists and bring us stories of relevance to Bostonians here and around the region. Live every weekday at 3.

  • Listen: Weekdays, 3 p.m. on 90.9 FM
  • Live Call-In: (800) 423-TALK
  • Listener Voicemail: (617) 358-0607
Most Popular
This site is best viewed with: Firefox | Internet Explorer 9 | Chrome | Safari