<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Rightswire &#187; Elections and Voting</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rightswire.org/category/topics/elections-and-voting/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rightswire.org</link>
	<description>Uncovering the American human rights story</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 00:46:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Rights Groups Defend Voting Rights Act Before Supreme Court</title>
		<link>http://www.rightswire.org/2009/03/19/rights-groups-defend-voting-rights-act-before-supreme-court/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rightswire.org/2009/03/19/rights-groups-defend-voting-rights-act-before-supreme-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:54:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>The Editors</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Civil and Political Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elections and Voting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Feeds]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedefendersonline.com/?p=4869</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NAACP Legal Defense Fund and partners take voting rights case before the Supreme Court


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://www.rightswire.org/2009/04/04/iowa-supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-gay-marriage/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Iowa Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage'>Iowa Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage</a> <small>Mary Shaw writes about the recent decision in Varnum v....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.rightswire.org/2009/03/30/more-religious-groups-back-employee-free-choice/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: More Religious Groups Back Employee Free Choice'>More Religious Groups Back Employee Free Choice</a> <small>Christian, Muslim, and Jewish labor groups sign on to the...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.rightswire.org/2009/03/23/honoring-human-rights-icon-carlotta-walls-lanier/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Honoring human rights icon Carlotta Walls LaNier'>Honoring human rights icon Carlotta Walls LaNier</a> <small>By D. Carene Bull Some might wonder what I, a...</small></li>
</ol>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yesterday <a title="NAACP Legal Defense Fund Files Brief in Landmark Voting Rights Supreme Court Case" href="http://www.naacpldf.org/content.aspx?article=1384">the NAACP Legal Defense Fund filed a brief</a>, along with several other public-interest law firms and nonprofit foundations, in what is shaping up to be the most important voting rights case to come before the U.S. Supreme Court in recent years.  Some experts contend that if the Court repudiates the lower court rulings in the case, which have upheld a key provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, Section 5<strong>,</strong> it would undermine much of the Act’s authority. Joining LDF in the brief are the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), Texas RioGrande Legal Aid, and People for the American Way.</p>
<p>At issue in the case,<em> Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Holder</em>, is a constitutional challenge to the Section 5 preclearance provision of the Act.  That provision requires jurisdictions with a history of racial discrimination to submit proposed voting changes to the Department of Justice of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals for pre-approval.  LDF is representing African American residents that live in the Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number 1 (“MUD”).</p>
<p><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-4871" title="VRA" src="http://thedefendersonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/vra-graphic.jpg" alt="VRA" width="240" height="171" /></p>
<p>The organizations’ friend-of-the-court-brief underscores the rule’s significance. “But for Section 5,” it says at one point, “… the ability of minorities to participate in our democracy would have been severely impaired.”</p>
<p>In 2006, after reviewing an expansive record, the Congress agreed with the need for Section 5 when it reauthorized the Voting Rights Act. The Northwest Austin district originally sued to ask to be exempt from Section 5. It’s now asking for the provision to be declared unconstitutional. Last spring the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia <a title="Legal Defense Fund Recognizes Important Civil Rights Victory in Texas Voting Rights Case " href="http://www.naacpldf.org/content.aspx?article=1285">rejected the district’s claims</a>.</p>
<p>The district’s brief to the Supreme Court also includes the assertion that, with the election of Barack Obama as the nation’s first African-American President, there is no longer a need for the <a title="Los Angeles Times: Conservatives invoke Obama in Voting Rights Act challenge" href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-voting-rights18-2009mar18,0,4998180.story">Voting Rights Act at all</a>.</p>
<p>But the brief counters that “No statute in our history embodies America’s commitment to democracy more clearly than the Voting Rights Act. Since 1965, Congress and five presidents have acted to create or preserve this statutory framework designed to prevent racially discriminatory barriers that deny or abridge our citizens’ right to vote.</p>
<p>“This case is the latest in a line of challenges  … [that have claimed the country no longer needs Section 5, the heart of the Voting Rights Act, to be the inclusive democracy that we strive to become … This argument cannot be reconciled with the evidence.”</p>
<p>Read more about the case on LDF’s <a title="NAACP Legal Defense Fund Files Brief in Landmark Voting Rights Supreme Court Case" href="http://www.naacpldf.org/content.aspx?article=1384">website</a> and <a title="Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Holder" href="http://www.naacpldf.org/content/pdf/austin/scotus_brief.pdf" class="broken_link">view the brief (PDF)</a>.  <a href="http://get.adobe.com/reader/"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-4502" title="get_adobe_reader" src="http://thedefendersonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/get_adobe_reader.gif" alt="get_adobe_reader" width="112" height="33" /></a></p>


<p>Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://www.rightswire.org/2009/04/04/iowa-supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-gay-marriage/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Iowa Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage'>Iowa Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage</a> <small>Mary Shaw writes about the recent decision in Varnum v....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.rightswire.org/2009/03/30/more-religious-groups-back-employee-free-choice/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: More Religious Groups Back Employee Free Choice'>More Religious Groups Back Employee Free Choice</a> <small>Christian, Muslim, and Jewish labor groups sign on to the...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.rightswire.org/2009/03/23/honoring-human-rights-icon-carlotta-walls-lanier/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Honoring human rights icon Carlotta Walls LaNier'>Honoring human rights icon Carlotta Walls LaNier</a> <small>By D. Carene Bull Some might wonder what I, a...</small></li>
</ol></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rightswire.org/2009/03/19/rights-groups-defend-voting-rights-act-before-supreme-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
