What are your feelings on the Supreme Court's change to the Voting RIghts Act of

Jump to Last Post 1-7 of 7 discussions (8 posts)
  1. CR Rookwood profile image83
    CR Rookwoodposted 5 years ago

    What are your feelings on the Supreme Court's change to the Voting RIghts Act of 1965?

    What are your feelings on the Supreme Court's change to the Voting RIghts Act of 1965? Do you understand the change? I get the impression a lot of people either 1) aren't interested, or 2) don't understand what happened.

  2. Cassie Smith profile image66
    Cassie Smithposted 5 years ago

    I thought it was timely that the Supreme Court recognized that race relations have improved over 50 years.  In addition, the way that particular part of the Voting Rights Act  was written, it would be impossible for the involved states to become independent of federal oversight and that is definitely unconstitutional.

    1. d.william profile image70
      d.williamposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      yes, racial discrimination has made some strides forward, but there is still much discrimination by old politicians from the south. That won't change until this generation dies off, or better laws are made to stop it.

  3. LandmarkWealth profile image79
    LandmarkWealthposted 5 years ago

    All that happened is that each state now plays by the same rules.  States are not required to preapprove changes in procedure via the Federal Gov't as they were prior, while other states/or counties were not required to be held to the same standard. States/counties were presumed to be guilty in advance.   Meanwhile there are voting irregularities in many states not subject to this scrutiny to begin with.  If it made sense to maintain these rules then we would have to apply them to counties and districts where candidates like the President received 100% of the vote in 59 voting districts, which is statistically impossible with a large enough sample when you consider the probability of human error.  The notion that their is voter discrimination or tampering only in places where minorities would be adversely affected is ridiculous.  The voting process has many problems I'd like to see corrected.  As long as the rules are the same for each state.  But it's hard for me to accept the notion that we need tougher rules in Mississippi and not in Pennsylvania, when the Black Panthers can have people standing outside a polling facility in Philadelphia with billie clubs in their hands and the DOJ refused to bring charges of voter intimidation.

  4. d.william profile image70
    d.williamposted 5 years ago

    Another blunder on their part. They live under the false impression that all states are above board in their election processes.  The day this ruling was put forth, all the states that are GOP controlled immediately started introducing bills that would restrict voting laws for minorities.  This is certainly another travesty of justice by the SCOTUS on the same level as their ruling to make corporations same status of individuals (except that corporations are allowed to skirt paying  taxes due to their own legislature allowing them loopholes, kickbacks, and exclusions, and individuals are not - also individuals who do not pay their taxes go to jail, corporations cannot be punished)
    The congress has the duty to now reinstate the law of 1965, or write a new one that will stop Republican run states from passing laws that restrict voting rights for certain people.  Of course we know they will not do that, and their debating over it will take around 20 years to reach any kind of solution, and another 20 to debate those solutions.
    The only logical (and fair) solution is to make all states be required to have congressional approval when they try to pass laws restricting any minority from voting. The idea of allowing ANY state the right to pass laws that discriminate for any reason is ludicrous in itself.  We cannot call ourselves the "United States of America" when we have division amongst the states that do what ever they want to whomever they want whenever they want.
    Congress is broken by corruption and so is the Supreme court.

  5. Credence2 profile image80
    Credence2posted 5 years ago

    I have to support the position taken by the court, reluctantly. Whatever mechanisms used by states to disenfranchise voters in 1965 has gone by the wayside. The problem are the new techniques much as have been used by the GOP over the last election cycle to bring legislative legitimacy to disenfranchisement. The enemy of suffrage for everyone has changed style and technique but not their intent. That reality was not demonstrated by defendents in the recent court decision to keep VRA intact.

    Also, we could bring in the tricks used in Wisconsin and Ohio last year., This problem is bigger than just a handful of southern states and it is difficult to continue to pick on them exclusively. We need a new standard for identifying illegal attempts at disenfranchisement in states and counties, one the GOP will never agree to. That is unfortunate.

  6. taburkett profile image59
    taburkettposted 5 years ago

    It was a great connotation concerning the haphazard content of the act.
    Maybe they should have indicated that the law required a complete repeal and replacement with the use of a thumbprint on every ballot to ensure complete accuracy and truthfulness.  That should eliminate any corruption for the voting dead.  As a requirement for verification, all driver licenses and identity cards should carry the thumbprint as well.  Then it would be very difficult for someone to steal another persons identity.  The question is, shall we live in a corruption free society or not.

  7. profile image0
    Larry Wallposted 5 years ago

    At first, I was bothered by it. After thinking a little, it may be good. This will give people a chance, particularly elected officials who draw voting district lines or enact other laws.

    If they have not yet come around to reality that in this country, all people are to be treated equally, then the court can reverse their ruling and put those offending states under the jurisdiction of the Justice Department for another 40 years.


This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)