The Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act. We must act now. 27JUN13

IN response to the supreme court's ruling on the 1965 Voting Rights Act progressive groups are organizing for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution guaranteeing the right to vote for every citizen, no matter what state you live in. This from Credo, and if you agree with it please click the link and sign on as a citizen sponsor, and please share this with others. And for more on this see my earlier post 

Bob Cesca - Supreme Court Helps the GOP Revive the Era of Jim Crow 27JUN13 http://bucknacktssordidtawdryblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/bob-cesca-supreme-court-helps-gop.html

Yesterday was a great day for those of us who support marriage equality. But we can't lose sight of the Supreme Court's shameful decision to accelerate voter suppression by gutting the Voting Rights Act. Please read the e-mail below and take action.

The Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act. We must act now.

Become a citizen co-sponsor: "I support an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that guarantees the freedom to vote for all."

Just days ago, the United States Supreme Court handed down a decision in the case of Shelby County v. Holder1 that destroyed the Voting Rights Act, ending 40 years of protection for minorities against discriminatory and unfair attempts to limit voting based on one's race.2 It's a shameful decision, and after hearing oral arguments, it sadly comes as no surprise. During the oral arguments in this case, Justice Scalia described the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act as "the perpetuation of a racial entitlement," and other justices questioned whether racial discrimination even still exists. Now that the Voting Rights Act has been gutted, we must act to protect the rights of everyone to vote. That’s why there must be a constitutional amendment that guarantees the freedom to vote for every citizen, regardless of race or where they live. And we’re joining with our friends at Color of Change to help make that happen. Join the movement to pass a constitutional amendment that protects the right to vote for every citizen. Click here to automatically add your name as a citizen co-sponsor. While the Supreme Court did not invalidate Section 5, a key part of the Voting Rights Act, it threw out the basic formula that has been used practically since the bill's passage in 1965 to determine where the Justice Department must provide approval before local election rules that would suppress the votes of African American and Latino citizens can be put into effect. While voter suppression rules can still be challenged by the Department of Justice after the fact, this will most likely happen too late to prevent minority voters from being blocked from the polls. The court's decision effectively guts the Voting Rights Act, rendering it useless until we elect a Congress willing to update this formula — which could take years. For decades the Voting Rights Act protected voters in pockets of the country with a history of racially discriminatory voting practices. Just this past election, it allowed the Justice Department to block attempts by Texas, South Carolina and Florida to implement discriminatory voting rules. For decades, the Voting Rights Act has helped narrow the gap that exists between civic participation rates of white voters and voters from communities of color. But now, right-wing efforts to make it harder for African Americans and Latino citizens to vote will be completely unfettered. With so many state legislatures and governorships held by these right-wing extremists, efforts to block voting access will be widespread, targeted and coordinated. But a constitutional amendment would forever enshrine the right to equal and protected access to the vote and ensure that we never again come face-to-face with the type of voter suppression that we’ll surely see in the next election, as the ramifications of this court decision are felt. Join the movement to pass a constitutional amendment that protects the right to vote for every citizen. Click here to automatically add your name as a citizen co-sponsor. For African Americans, voting has never been a “racial entitlement.” It is a right that was earned through extraordinary sacrifice. The Voting Rights Act was the result of decades of hard work, of advocacy, of protests and marches and courage before fire hoses and police dogs. It was one of the crowning achievements of a generation. Now we can put those protections back in place and ensure that the right to vote is guaranteed by the highest law of the land. While the road to passing a constitutional amendment for the freedom to vote is long and paved with obstacles, if we join together with our allies, we can make it happen. Join the movement to pass a constitutional amendment that protects the right to vote for every citizen. Click the link below to automatically add your name as a citizen co-sponsor: http://act.credoaction.com/go/974?t=6&akid=8248.179403.-BqL33 Thank you for standing up for the right to vote. Becky Bond, Political Director CREDO Action from Working Assets Learn more about this campaign 1. Lyle Denniston, "Voting rights case: Made simple," SCOTUSblog, February 8th, 2013. 2. Mark Sherman, "High Court Voids Key Part of Voting Rights Act." Associated Press, June 25, 2013

While Politicians Run, Conservative Judges Stand for Voting Rights 19DEZ12

I can not help but think the main reason so many have turned against the Voting Rights Act is because we have a Black President. People tolerated the protection of minorities rights to vote because they could never see the nation being lead by an African American, the president would always be a white man. But the times, they are a changin'!!!! And most Americans have come to the realization that the color of a person's skin isn't important, it really is their character that matters. Deep seated racism is rearing it's ugly head, and will try to influence the decision of the US Supreme Court. The future of our county hangs in the balance, we can only hope and pray the court upholds the law and not bends with the political winds. From HuffPost....
In a speech at the John F. Kennedy Library last week, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder made an impassioned case for the present amd continuing need for the Voting Rights Act, in particular the Act's Section 5, saying," "This provision has consistently enjoyed broad, bipartisan support - including, most recently, in 2006, when an overwhelming Congressional majority joined with President Bush to reauthorize its protections."
He's right. It is almost hard to believe now, but just six years ago Republicans and Democrats came together in both chambers of Congress to reauthorize the landmark Voting Rights Act by overwhelming majorities -- 98 to 0 in the Senate, 390-33 in the House. The 25-year reauthorization of the act was signed into law on July 27, 2006 by President George W. Bush.
The story of how quickly conservative politicians abandoned their support for the iconic Voting Rights Act is one of the most depressing examples of the toxic brand of politics that has broken out on the far right. Just as important, though lesser known, is the support for this critical statute provided by lower court federal judges from across the ideological spectrum. Indeed, judges appointed to the bench by President Bush have been among the most powerful advocates for the constitutionality of, and continued need for, the Voting Rights Act.
Whether the conservative majority on the Roberts Court will follow the political winds on the right, or hew to the legal analysis of conservative judges on the lower courts, is one of the critical backstories in Shelby County v. Holder, a blockbuster challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act -- a critical part of the law -- that will be decided by the Court this spring.
On the political front, the floor debate over the 2006 reauthorization of the act stands as a striking example of how quickly Washington has changed for the worse in recent years. In 2006, Republican lawmakers were tripping over themselves to voice their support for the Voting Rights Act.
For example, Senator Chuck Grassley, citing his own remarks during the previous reauthorization vote in 1982, said "the Voting Rights Act is a key tool -- perhaps the key tool -- in eradicating any remaining vestiges of racial discrimination." Senator Mitch McConnell reminded his colleagues: "We have, of course, renewed the Voting Rights Act periodically..., overwhelmingly, and on a bipartisan basis, year after year after year because Members of Congress realize this is a piece of legislation which has worked." Republican Judiciary Committee members touted the eight months of studies and markups that went into the final bill. Southern senators spoke powerfully on how the civil rights movement had touched their lives. Lawmakers from covered jurisdictions gamely affirmed that the law had had a positive impact in their states. To be sure, there were some Republicans who were sharply critical of the act, including several Senators who signed an extraordinary post-passage Judiciary Committee Report, but by and large, Republicans in 2006 agreed with President Bush that "[i]n four decades since the Voting Rights Act was first passed, we've made progress toward equality, yet the work for a more perfect union is never ending."
In 2012, the political landscape looks very different. Following a dramatic overreaction to a handful of "studies" on voter fraud that have been thoroughly debunked, Republican legislatures around the country passed harsh new restrictions on voting and registering, including strict photo ID laws, which not one state had on the books prior to 2006. Crass calculations about demographics appear to have fed the trend. Famously, one overly candid lawmaker crowed that new voter ID laws would "allow Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania." Just last week, a GOP consultant suggested that long lines at the polls represented an advantage for Republican campaigns. That's sickening.
Correspondingly, it's very hard right now to find a conservative politician willing to defend the Voting Rights Act, even though most voted for reauthorization just six years ago. One of the few exceptions is Representative Jim Sensenbrenner, who recently told NPR: "I'm proud of this law... Going up to the Supreme Court, saying that the court should make findings that are opposite of the findings that Congress made after extremely extensive deliberation, I don't think is the way the system ought to work." Sadly, Sensenbrenner is a rare and courageous voice in the conservative wilderness.
The remarkable thing is that this willful amnesia about the wisdom of the Voting Rights Act does not seem to have filtered into the federal courts, where conservative judges have been quite adamant in explaining the continuing need for the act and the constitutionality of the challenged provision: Section 5, which requires that jurisdictions with a history of discrimination get "preclearance" from the federal government before changing voting rules. As these judges have recognized, once you read the Constitution, it is clear that Congress has the power to eliminate the scourge of racial discrimination in voting.
Indeed, perhaps the single most powerful defense of the constitutionality of Section 5 was penned by District Judge John Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, who wrote a 151-page opinion rejecting the challenges brought by Shelby County. Another George W. Bush appointee, Judge Thomas Griffith, joined an opinion by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals affirming the ruling by Judge Bates. Conservative judges also wrote or joined a number of other very important opinions earlier this year that employed Section 5 to prevent some of the most disturbing efforts by states to make it more difficult to vote from ever going into effect.
This sets the question as the Shelby County case is heard by the Supreme Court: will the Court's conservative majority, including President George W. Bush's two appointees to the Court, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, follow the conservative political winds or the well-reasoned opinions by conservative judges? One of our nation's most important and successful statutes hangs in this balance.
This piece was written with CAC's Emily Phelps and will be cross-posted on CAC's blog Text and History.
Learn more about the fight to defend voting rights. 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-kendall/while-politicians-run-con_b_2332118.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotifications