Maybe a Voting Rights Act is what we have to settle for in
immediately. But really, nothing short of a constitutional amendment
will fix the problems in the long-term.
The SCOTUS has shown it
can knock down any VRAct that they wish to. However, they do have a good
basis for having that power. The original US Constitution says nothing
about the popular vote. At the time, popular vote was hardly even a
political theory, and it was impossible in 1789 to take a popular vote
for president. Because the states had literally created the federal
government, they started out with having greater political power than
the central government. So, they were left their choice in conducting
elections. The results: only 4% of the free male population had any
privilege of voting.
It isn't until 1868 that the 14th Amendment
was enacted, that a right to vote is mentioned, but without a previous
precedent in the constitution, it hangs in mid-air.
The 14th
Amendment dictates several rules to the states. In the first section, it
says anyone born in or naturalized as a US citizen has equal rights and
privileges, the state could not pick and choose which ones had rights.
That sets up the second section, that covers specifically the right to
vote:
"Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state."
[Emphasis mine, the links are from the source, and explain the later amendments made to reflect universal suffrage and the voting age changed to eighteen.]
Prior to this, the states determined who had the right to vote. It did make
Just
in case the states didn't get the message (because the ex-Confederate
states weren't), the 15th Amendment was ratified in 1870, it said:
Section 1:
"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."
Section 2:
"The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
At this stage, it's apparent that the general Right to Vote was no longer just a political theory, but would be the practice from then on.
But
still, the details pertaining to the right to vote weren't mentioned.
This left the states to still select who had the right, as long as it
wasn't due to race, color, or previous servitude. If they could find
exceptions for other reasons that corresponded approximately to race.
This let all kinds of abuses and methods pass through. It also didn't
give the states any obligation to make voting easy, nor to gerrymander
fairly, nor did it regulate the obligations the states had in regards to
the voting rolls.
The SCOTUS pretty much killed the Voting Rights Act in 2013 in the Shelby County vs Holder,
repealing two key provisions . These allowed the states that had a
history of voter discrimination to start practicing it again.
The
conservative constructionists/originalists could do it because the
original Constitution doesn't define the right to vote. Therefore, they
could say the Founders didn't care about it. Without reference to the
intent of the Founders, the conservative SCOTUS felt free to impose its
own standard.
Only a Voting Rights Amendment will take the
decision out of their hands, and keep the legislative enforcement to the
Congress where it belongs.
No comments:
Post a Comment