Skip to main content
Sojourners
faith in action for social justice
Sojourners
About
About SojournersEventsOur TeamWork With UsMediaWays to GiveInvite a SpeakerContact Us
SojoAction
OverviewTake ActionIssue AreasResourcesFaith-Rooted AdvocatesChurch Engagement
Magazine
Current IssueArchivesManage My SubscriptionWrite for Sojourners
Sections
LatestPoliticsColumnsLiving FaithArts & CultureGlobalPodcastsVideoPreaching The Word
Subscribe
MagazineRenewPreaching the WordCustomer ServiceNewsletters
Donate
Login / Register

What SCOTUS Could Learn From Paula Deen

By Jamie Calloway-Hanauer
Paula Deen, kai hecker / Shutterstock.com
Paula Deen, kai hecker / Shutterstock.com
Jun 26, 2013
Share Full Article
Share As A Gift
Share a paywall-free link to this article.
This feature is only available for subscribers.

Start your subscription for as low as $4.95. Already a subscriber?

  • Link copied!
Share This Article
Share Options
  • Link copied!

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court struck down part of the Voting Rights Act that was enacted in 1965 to root out racial discrimination in voting. The specific section of the Act that was stricken — Section 4 — set forth a formula for determining which jurisdictions need federal clearance before making even minor changes to voting procedures. The impact of striking Section 4 is that the most important part of the Act, Section 5, is now rendered useless. Section 5 provides that states, cities, and counties with a history of racial discrimination in voting must “pre-clear” changes to voting procedures with the Department of Justice or a special court in Washington, D.C. Without the formula in Section 4 to determine which states, cities, and counties the preclearance should apply to, the preemptive protection provided by Section 5 no longer exists, and any future challenges to changes in voting procedure must happen after such changes are already in effect.

The majority of the Court felt that racial minorities do not continue to face discriminatory voting practices, and that the preclearance requirement was based on 40-year-old facts that had no logical bearing on present day. Chief Justice Roberts, Jr., wrote:

“Our country has changed. While any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions.”

The practical application of Tuesday's decision is that states will be able to enact potentially discriminatory laws that previously had been blocked. This was made immediately apparent in Texas, which announced after the ruling that voter identification laws would go into effect immediately.

Read the Full Article

To continue reading this article — and get full access to all our magazine content — subscribe now for as little as $4.95. Your subscription helps sustain our nonprofit journalism and allows us to pay authors for their terrific work! Thank you for your support.
Subscribe Now!
Already a subscriber? Login
Paula Deen, kai hecker / Shutterstock.com
Search Sojourners

Subscribe

Login Magazine Newsletters Preaching The Word
Follow on Facebook Follow on Bluesky Follow on Instagram Subscribe to our RSS Feed
Sojourners
Donate Products Editorial Policies Privacy Policy

Media

Advertising Press

Opportunities

Careers Fellowship Program

Contact

Office
408 C St. NE
Washington DC, 20002
Phone 202-328-8842
Fax 202-328-8757
Email sojourners@sojo.net
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2025