The 1965 Voting Rights Act, which gave African-Americans in the deep South access to the ballot box, is a ?racial entitlement,? U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said Wednesday as the court heard oral arguments in a legal challenge to the landmark law from the state of Alabama.
The outspoken, ultraconservative Scalia discounted the fact that Congress has repeatedly reenacted the law ? most recently by a 99-0 Senate vote in 2006 ? and argued that its renewal is ?not the kind of question you can leave to Congress.?
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin "Nino" Scalia describes Voting Rights Act as a "racial entitlement"
?I don?t think there is anything to be gained by any senator to vote against continuation of this act,? Scalia said.? ?They are going to lose votes if they do not re-enact the Voting Rights Act.? Even the name of it is wonderful ? the Voting Rights Act.? Who is going to vote against that in the future? I am fairly confident it will be re-enacted in perpetuity.
?Whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through normal political processes.?
The case of Shelby County vs. Holder is a challenge to the landmark Section 5 of the act.? It requires nine states (eight in the South) as well as local governments in other states to ?pre-clear? changes in voting procedures with the U.S. Department of Justice.? The act has been invoked as recently as the 2012 election, in which several state legislatures made rules changes designed to impede early voting.
The Voting Rights Act appears to have solid support from the Supreme Court?s four moderate-progressive justices.? But it faced hostile questioning from Chief Justice John Roberts.? He asked Solicitor General Donald Verrelli if ?the citizens of the South are more racist than citizens of the North.?
The plaintiffs have argued that restrictions that the Voting Rights Act sought to redress are no longer present in places like Shelby County, Alabama.
The court?s deciding vote appears to rest with Justice Anthony Kennedy, who appeared none too friendly to the landmark civil rights law.? ?Times change,? Kennedy said during the oral argument. He also asked how much longer Alabama must live ?under the trusteeship of the federal government.?
Justice Sonia Sotomayor appeared taken aback at Scalia?s observations.? (Scalia has made news in recent months with off-the-bench remarks that appeared homophobic.)
?Do you think Section 5 was voted for because it was a racial entitlement?? she asked the attorney for Shelby County.? He dodged the question.
Source: http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2013/02/27/scalia-voting-rights-act-is-racial-entitlement/
syracuse basketball chipper jones chipper jones mickael pietrus heart transplant the international preppers
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.