27 February 2013
Last updated at 18:43 GMT
Voting law before US Supreme Court
A challenge from an Alabama county over a landmark voter rights law is being heard at the US Supreme Court.
- Will ID laws keep voters from polls?
-
Pennsylvania voter ID law halted
US top court hears landmark voting measure challenge
Protesters, along with some members of Congress, demonstrated in front of the US top court on Wednesday
A challenge from an Alabama county over a landmark voter rights law is being heard at the US Supreme Court.Shelby County says requiring places with a history of discrimination to get approval before making any changes to election law is no longer necessary.
The measure is part of the 1968 Voting Rights Act, extended for 25 years in 2006 with wide bipartisan support.
A crucial justice appeared to be sympathetic to Shelby County's argument during Wednesday's hearing.
'South more racist'? Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court's swing vote on racial issues, said during discussion that "times change".
Chief Justice Roberts asked Solicitor General Donald Verrilli whether the Obama administration thinks Southerners "are more racist than citizens in the North".
Continue reading the main story“Start Quote
Sherrilyn Ifill NAACPIt moved the burden from victims to perpetrators”Mr Verrilli replied no.The Voting Rights Act creates strict oversight of election laws in nine states, most in the US South, as well as in a few jurisdictions in other states.
Protesters against the suit marched in front of the US high court on Wednesday.
The lawsuit says the "dire local conditions" that once justified strict federal oversight of elections no longer exist.
The Obama administration and civil rights groups acknowledge progress made in combating discriminatory attitudes towards African-Americans and others covered by the law, but says Congress was justified in maintaining the provision in 2006.
If the advanced approval went away, "it would be hard for us to catch those things up front to make sure that elections are done in an equitable way," President Barack Obama told a radio host, Joe Madison, last week.
The law's supporters say it has been successful because it requires governments to demonstrate that their proposed election changes will not discriminate.
"It moved the burden from victims to perpetrators,'' said Sherrilyn Ifill, the head of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) legal defence and educational fund.
Shelby County and several states joining the suit say Congress did not take into account dramatic increases in the voter registration and participation by minorities when it agreed to extend the law, as well as discrimination problems in other places not covered by the provision.
Their lawyers also argue those who are discriminated against could still file a lawsuit under the other provisions of the measure.
The Supreme Court already has expressed scepticism about the continuing need for the law.
In a similar challenge four years ago, Chief Justice John Roberts that the law's past success "is not adequate justification to retain the preclearance requirements".
Justices sidestepped the question of its constitutionality at the time.
In total, the provision covers Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia, as well as certain places in California, Florida, New York, North Carolina and South Dakota, Michigan and New Hampshire.
COPY http://www.bbc.co.uk
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário