Immediately after North Carolina passed the worst voter-suppression law in the country, Advancement Project brought a suit in federal court challenging the law on behalf of the North Carolina NAACP. In light of the avalanche of provisions designed to restrict voting, we had to fight back.
Texas waited just two hours after the ruling to announce that the state would begin enforcing its voter ID law. The U.S. Department of Justice hit back with lawsuits against both measures, showing the Supreme Court's ruling does not mean that it's open season on voters.
Republicans are at it again, making it harder to vote. It is no coincidence that these major voting changes are being considered a week after the Supreme Court struck down the coverage formula in Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act.
In cases involving an act of Congress, such as the Voting Rights Act, the Court pays great deference to findings of facts by Congress. Congress is, after all, the peoples' elected representatives; and, it can be changed.
The path of a trailblazer always holds resistance. To pioneer meaningful change, one must be prepared to defend themself against the inevitable opposing force. One man who has come to know this all too well lately is U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.
While the entire nation fights to retain their democratic rights the Supreme Court wastes time hearing a plea from Alabama, a state that has spent years trying to subvert the vote and supplant democracy.
The only suspense is in waiting to find out if Massachusetts continues to be used to justify the ruling and whether the Court applies the Scalia Cowardly Congress theory to justify its ruling. One thing seems certain: Scalia and Roberts will be the winners. The voters will be the losers.
Despite the commitment of those who devoted their lives to voter protections, the right to vote remains fragile for many Americans. From voter ID laws to restrictions on early voting, as a country we cannot allow anyone to say "this isn't a problem anymore."
This nation still has a way to go before state disfranchisement is truly a thing of the past. Gutting the most important provision of this landmark law is not just unwarranted but harmful to the government's ability to eradicate voter suppression.