Strengthening the Voting Rights Act

Congress passed the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in 1965 to protect against race discrim­in­a­tion in voting. The VRA was later amended to protect against discrim­in­a­tion against language minor­it­ies as well. This moment­ous piece of legis­la­tion deliv­ers on the prom­ise of the 14th and 15th Amend­ments that every citizen is entitled to an equal oppor­tun­ity to parti­cip­ate in our demo­cracy.

But that right is under threat, partic­u­larly because of two Supreme Court decisions. Section 5 of the VRA requires states and local­it­ies with a history of discrim­in­a­tion to obtain approval from the Depart­ment of Justice or a court before chan­ging voting rules (a process known as “preclear­ance”).

In 2013, the Supreme Court held in Shelby County v. Holder that the formula for determ­in­ing which juris­dic­tions were subject to preclear­ance was uncon­sti­tu­tional because it was outdated, evis­cer­at­ing a key provi­sion of the VRA. This decision ushered in a wave of efforts in states previ­ously covered under Section 5 to restrict voting rights, leav­ing to Congress the respons­ib­il­ity of draft­ing an updated cover­age formula to restore the force of Section 5.

In July 2021, the Supreme Court made it more diffi­cult to chal­lenge laws that restrict voting rights under Section 2 of the VRA. In Brnovich v. Demo­cratic National Commit­tee, the Court ruled that two Arizona voting laws did not burden voters of color enough to consti­tute a viol­a­tion of VRA. In so doing, the Court largely ignored the long­stand­ing consid­er­a­tions that courts have relied on to determ­ine whether discrim­in­a­tion exists under Section 2, which allows voters to sue to block discrim­in­at­ory voting laws. Instead, the Court created new “guide­posts” to adju­dic­ate Section 2 claims, such as whether a state provides more oppor­tun­it­ies to vote now than the state did when Section 2 was last amended in 1982.

These Supreme Court decisions, along with the wave of restrict­ive voting legis­la­tion that passed this year, under­scores the urgent need for Congress to pass the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advance­ment Act. The bill, named for the late civil rights cham­pion and congress­man, was passed by the House in August and is now before the Senate.

The John Lewis Voting Rights Act would modern­ize and revital­ize the VRA by strength­en­ing legal protec­tions against discrim­in­at­ory voting policies. First, the bill restores what the Supreme Court struck down in Shelby County by creat­ing a new formula to determ­ine which juris­dic­tions with a history of voting discrim­in­a­tion are subject to preclear­ance, and it adds prac­tice-based cover­age, making certain types of discrim­in­at­ory voting changes subject to preclear­ance. The bill also restores Section 2 in the wake of Brnovich to ensure that voters have the full abil­ity to chal­lenge voting discrim­in­a­tion in court.

To learn more about the Voting Rights Advance­ment Act, check out the follow­ing resources:

• Voting Rights Act Analyses, Reports, and Explain­ers

Analyses, reports, and explain­ers from the Bren­nan Center outlining the need to restore the Voting Rights Act

• John Lewis Voting Rights Advance­ment Act Testi­mony

Congres­sional hear­ings and testi­mony in support of the Voting Rights Advance­ment Act