Talking about the 50th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act

Looking forward to discussing the 50th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, early voting, same day voter registration, gerrymandering, and more at 5:20 pm with Ian Masters on KPFK.

"In Kern County, Voting Rights Bill Meets Opposition"

Great to talk to Kerry Klein of Valley Public Radio for this one.

Last week, the Kern County Board of Supervisors went on record against AB 280.  It’s a California bill that would require counties with high minority populations to get approval from Sacramento before making major changes in election procedure. 

For instance, before moving a polling site location, Kern County would need to get the ok from the California Secretary of State to ensure that it’s not discriminating against minorities and low-income voters.

Kern County Supervisor Leticia Perez says that would be far too costly.

Perez: "The process by which the county would have to engage in determining these sites, getting them to the Secretary of State very early on, would really impose a remarkable burden on our elections division, it would be very expensive."

According to Perez, moving polling locations could cost the county as much as $700,000 per major election.  She says the county supports the spirit of the bill, but it’s just not practical.

At this point, Kern County has no say in whether or not the bill passes.  But Jessica Levinson of Loyola Law School says the county’s opposition is more than symbolic.

Levinson: "Kern County coming out and saying this is going to be too costly, it’s going to be too time consuming, could give some politicians who are predisposed not to want to vote for the bill anyway, some cover, or it could sway some people who are on the fence."

Levinson says that in some jurisdictions, legislation that protects voters is needed—and that some states are already feeling the vacuum left behind by the federal Voting Rights Act.

Levinson: "That’s why we see so many voting rights changes.  We see elimination of early voting, we see changes in registration laws, we see a number of states implementing voter ID. So we see a lot of proposals or laws that make voting more difficult."

Under the federal Voting Rights Act, 4 California counties had been singled out as needing voter protections. Under AB 280, any county with a minority population of more than 20% would qualify.

AB 280 has passed the State Assembly and is currently in the Senate.

"Is the Supreme Court Out of Order?"

Watch Dahlia Lithwick and Linda Greenhouse discuss on Bill Moyers.

"How the Supreme Court Saved the Right to Vote"

My latest book review is here, on the Los Angeles Review of Books. 

Here is an excerpt:

Smith also brings us inside the courtroom for the oral arguments and subsequent conferences, deliberations, and opinions drafting by the justices. This portion of the book will be particularly intriguing, even if not groundbreaking, for scholars of the Court. Smith’s behind-the-scenes portrayal of the Supreme Court is at times reminiscent of Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong’s classic book, The Brethren, which provides a behind-the-scenes look at the Supreme Court during the beginning of Warren Burger’s tenure as Chief Justice. And even though the reader ultimately knows the outcome of the major plot points, this middle section of the book, in particular, is full of maneuvering and suspense.

This could be big for voting rights: "Supreme Court to Hear Ala. Redistricting Challenge"

Here.

"The Walking Dead Supreme Court"

Ciara Torres-Spelliscy blogs at the Huffington Post.

Got Prop 8? The VRA? And Voter Registration?

Here are links to my most recent SCOTUS-related op-eds.

The Supreme Court Rules There Is No One Left Standing To Appeal Prop. 8

Who’s Killing the Voting Rights Act, Congress or the Supreme Court?

Did Justice Scalia Just Make It Easier To Register To Vote?

Who’s Killing the Voting Rights Act, Congress or the Supreme Court?

I have a new op-ed in Pacific Standard. 

Here is the last paragraph:

What Congress gave voting rights activists with the creation and re-authorization of Section 5, it took away with its inaction regarding Section 4. And now the Supreme Court has done its part.

Down goes Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act

Today, in Shelby v. Holder, the Court's much-anticipated decision regarding the Voting Rights Act, the Court ruled that Section 4 of that act is unconstitutional. Section 4 contains the so-called "coverage formula," used to determine which jurisdictions will be subject to Section 5. Section 5, in turn, requires that certain jurisdictions "pre-clear" any voting changes with the federal government. The Court ruled that the coverage formula, based on voter registration and turnout information from the '60s and '70s, is invalid.
Much more to come. 

The Supreme Court, Rusty the red panda, and Snowden...

As the morning wears on I have grown increasingly concerned that Rusty the red panda has absconded with the Supreme Court's much-anticipated decisions re DOMA, Prop 8, and the VRA, and has headed out trying to find Snowden, who wants to publish the opinions himself. 

More Latino Representation in Compton?

One of my recent posts on KCET.org.

Last week the city of Compton agreed to put a measure on the ballot, which would institute voting by district in city council races. Currently, Compton's city council members are elected based on at-large city-wide voting.

The decision came in reaction to criticisms that Latinos are massively underrepresented in city government. Critics of the current system filed a lawsuit under the California Voting Rights Act, contending that Latinos must have a larger voice in local government. Specifically, proponents of the lawsuit argue that the current at-large elections dilute Latino voting power, and that if elections occur on a district basis, there will be at least one majority-Latino district.

Latinos now account for almost two-thirds of the city's nearly 100,000 residents. However, only a percentage of those residents are eligible to vote, because of age and other factors. Latinos make up much less than two-thirds of the members of the city government.

Proponents of the lawsuit and the city agreed to settle the suit by placing a measure of the ballot that would create by-district voting. If the measure fails in June it will be back on the November ballot.

Finish reading this post on KCET.org.

"DOJ Investigation Finds DOJ Behaved Normally in Black Panther Investigation"

"For what it's worth, the DOJ's Office of Professional Conduct's report on the unending New Black Panther Party affair -- the charge that the Civil Rights Division failed to pursue more charges against two members of the hate group who held nightsticks outside a mostly-black polling place on Election Day 2008 -- clears the DOJ of any wrongdoing, and clears the Obama administration of any wrongdoing. A day after this came out, I can't detect any mellowing-out from the people who pushed for the investigation."

Slate has more.

Colorado "State House approves bill to ensure voting rights of deployed military"

"The Colorado House gave unanimous approval today to a bill co-sponsored by Rep. Pete Lee of Colorado Springs that aims to ensure a uniform system of voting laws for overseas military personnel and civilians."
More here. 

"New Black Panther Party Case Not Going Away Though Many Wish It Would"

"The New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case dating back to 2008 was back in the news this week with the finding by federal government lawyers that politics played no role in the Justice Department's earlier decision to dismiss most of the charges in the case."

NPR has more.

News from Florida: "Civil Rights Group Says Rick Scott Violated The Voting Rights Act With New Restrictions On Felons"

The Broward New Times this blog.

"Proponents of DC voting rights to meet with Senate staffers"

"Advocates for D.C. voting rights will press the Senate Tuesday to oppose the House spending bill.

The DC Voting Rights Coalition opposes language in the House GOP bill that would prohibit the District of Columbia from using local tax dollars on public programs for AIDS prevention and access to reproductive healthcare. The language is included in legislation that would cut spending this year by $61 billion."

The Hill has more.

"Port Chester to Appeal U.S. Voting-Rights Ruling Aimed at Helping Latinos"

"It seemed as if Port Chester, N.Y., was finally about to end a bitter chapter in its history — after four years of voting-rights litigation against the federal government, more than $1.2 million in legal fees, the creation of a new voting system and the election of the municipality’s first Latino to its board of trustees.
But this week, the village’s elected leaders decided that they were not done fighting."

The NYT has this report.

"Is Anyone Watching?"

"Two years ago, the Supreme Court looked over a cliff and decided not to jump. The question was whether a core section of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as renewed by Congress in 2006 for another 25 years, was constitutional. A majority opinion by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. strongly suggested that it wasn’t."


Linda Greenhoues, of the NYT, has more here. 

"NY suburb appealing federal voting-rights ruling"

"A village outside New York City has decided to appeal a federal court ruling that led to an unusual voting system and the election of its first Hispanic trustee."


The AP (via WSJ) has more here. 

Do troops need to sue for voting rights?

"Giving service members and overseas civilians the right to sue their election officials for violating their voting rights may be one way to ensure those rights are protected, some lawmakers said in a hearing called to explore absentee voting problems."

The Army Times has more here.