In the Nation’s Capital: House Passes Landmark Voting Rights Legislation, Nearly 60 Years After the March on Washington
This week, Congress moved one step closer to restoring an essential provision of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). On Tuesday evening, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the historic John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, H.R. 4, with all Democratic members voting in favor and all Republicans opposed. The landmark legislation includes a new formula for determining which states are subject to preclearance under Section 5 of the VRA, which requires states with a history of discriminatory voting practices to get federal approval before passing new voting laws. The previous formula was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013.
The Biden administration issued a statement of support prior to its passage, saying it will work with Congress to advance the legislation. Efforts by state legislatures to suppress voters, limit voting methods and delegitimize the outcome of the 2020 election “violate the most basic ideals of America,” the statement reads. “The Administration looks forward to working with Congress as the VRAA proceeds through the legislative process to ensure that the bill achieves lasting reform consistent with Congress’ broad constitutional authority to protect voting rights and to strengthen our democracy.”
Alongside the For the People Act, the legislation is part of a historic election reform effort by Democrats that would significantly expand ballot access, protect voters from suppression and revitalize our democracy. H.R. 4 has passed the House twice in previous sessions but faces an uphill battle in the Senate where Democrats only hold 50 votes. However, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and his Republican colleague Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), who showed hesitation on the For the People Act, have signaled their support for H.R. 4.
Almost 60 years ago, Martin Luther King Jr. and Congressman John Lewis, alongside other civil rights giants, gathered in the nation’s capital for the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. On August 28, 1963, hundreds of thousands of Americans came together with a list of clearly stated demands for the government. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were direct responses to the March and the decades of advocacy leading up to it. Today, however, the legislative gains of the March are under threat. The Supreme Court has chipped away at the VRA’s protection in recent years and Republicans continue to attack voting rights across the states. Read more on how to fight back in this week’s Explainer, The Legacy of the March on Washington.
|
|
In the States: As Democrats Make Strides Toward Democracy Reform, Republicans Switch Tactics
Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania’s bipartisan redistricting committee voted on Tuesday to end prison gerrymandering in the state. Prison gerrymandering occurs when prison populations are counted in the redistricting process as residents of the district where they are incarcerated instead of their original community. Since prisons are typically located in rural areas, prison gerrymandering, therefore, grants more political power to rural, typically racially-homogenous districts by including incarcerated individuals in their population count, drawing maps that dilute the voting power of voters residing in urban districts, which are often more racially diverse. “Across the country, prison-based gerrymandering weakens minority voting strength and transfers political power from urban communities of color to predominantly white areas,” according to the NAACP. Pennsylvania’s redistricting commission passed a resolution to mostly end this practice when drawing legislative districts. Except for prisoners serving life sentences, incarcerated Pennsylvanians will be considered residents of the Pennsylvania district where they last resided before beginning their sentence. For homeless Pennsylvanians, the district in which they most frequently stayed and received services will be counted as their residence. The resolution passed with a 3-2 vote with both Republicans on the commission opposing the provision. Read the resolution here.
Nebraska: Republicans in the Nebraska Legislature are turning to a new tactic to get restrictive voter ID laws passed in the state. The conservative group, Citizens for Voter ID is gathering signatures for a petition that would add a new constitutional amendment on the 2022 general election ballot which would require voters to provide a photo ID in order to vote. The petition must gather the number of signatures equivalent to 10% of registered voters in order to be included on the 2022 ballot. Bills to impose new voter ID requirements have failed to pass the Nebraska Legislature repeatedly, and voting rights groups in the state such as the ACLU and Civic Nebraska stand opposed to the constitutional amendment. “The bills have been pushed back and defeated in the legislature for a reason,” said Steve Smith of Civic Nebraska. “It’s because they’re unpopular, because they’re unworkable, because they’re costly.” Republicans across the country are embracing ballot measures as a way to get their suppressive agenda passed. Republicans in Arizona announced last week that they are gathering signatures for a ballot measure that would impose voter ID requirements on early ballots, a move that would affect 3 million of the state’s 3.4 million registered voters.
Georgia: Last week, Georgia’s state election board appointed a three-member panel to review election administration in Fulton County. The panel is newly required under Georgia’s new election law and is the first step in a potential Republican takeover of the Democratic county’s election administration. The recently passed law, Senate Bill 202, requires the state election board to appoint a review panel of a county’s election administration if enough lawmakers from the county request it. Republicans in Fulton County requested the review last month. Based on their findings in the review, the Republican-controlled election board can then take over Fulton County’s election administration by installing a temporary administrator to oversee the process, including the counting of votes. The panel chosen to conduct the review by the state election board is bipartisan — members include one Democrat, one Republican and one lawyer from the secretary of state’s office. The sole Democratic member of the state election board said, however, that despite this, the panel “is going to be under tremendous political pressure on both sides to come to preordained conclusions.”
And More:
- Colorado: In this week’s Data Dive, we explore how Colorado’s all-mail voting system makes significant strides towards equity for voters in the state, democratizing access and increasing voter turnout for groups less likely to vote in neighboring states. Read “In Colorado, All-Mail Voting Is a Step Toward Equity” on Democracy Docket now.
- Pennsylvania: Republican lawmakers are following in the footsteps of their Arizona colleagues and plan to launch a formal investigation into the results of the state’s 2020 election despite no evidence of fraud. Read more here.
|
|
In the Courts: A Key Swing State Feels the Redistricting Heat
Wisconsin: On Monday, a third lawsuit was filed in Wisconsin to ensure the state enacts new maps before the next election cycle. This is the second lawsuit filed in federal district court regarding Wisconsin’s redistricting process; the remaining suit was filed in the Wisconsin Supreme Court. This complaint, brought on behalf of Black Leaders Organizing for Communities, Voces de la Frontera, League of Women Voters of Wisconsin and individual voters, alleges that the release of new census data has made the current state legislative maps unconstitutionally malapportioned and asks that the court prohibit the use of current district maps in future elections and implement new maps that fairly and constitutionally represent Wisconsin's current population. The complaint also references the first Wisconsin redistricting case filed in federal court by Democratic voters to support its claims, arguing that, along with “past practice” and the “current partisan divide Wisconsin’s government,” the “pending action by Democratic voters alleging a malapportionment in state legislative districts all strongly indicate that legislative impasse over new state legislative districts will occur, and that once again the federal court will be required to resolve the conflict.” Read the complaint here.
|
|
What We're Doing
Three things to do today to stay engaged in the fight!
We’re taking action:
This Saturday, the March On for Voting Rights is taking place in cities across the country. Find your closest march here, and show up to make your voice heard for democracy.
We’re listening:
Twitter Spaces with Marc and Democracy Docket is moving to a new time! Tune in today at 1:30PM ET to ask your most pressing questions about voting rights. Join the Spaces by going to the @DemocracyDocket Twitter account on your iPhone or Android.
We’re watching:
Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Ca.) speaks on the House floor about the importance of the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. Watch here.
Join Marc and Democracy Docket for another weekly Twitter Spaces! Tune in today at 1PM ET to the @DemocracyDocket Twitter account on your iPhone or Android.
|
|
Spotlights: Damaging the Federal Courts Forever and the Anti-Protest Legislation Criminalizing Community Mobilization
In our first Spotlight this week, former Minnesota Senator Al Franken writes about a long-standing procedural tradition that ensured the balance of our judiciary: the blue slip. This slip allowed Senators to have a say in judicial nominations in their home states, encouraging bipartisanship between Senators and the Administration and keeping extremist judges off the bench. But under Donald Trump, Republicans have done away with this time-honored tradition, stacking the courts with unqualified conservative loyalists and damaging the future of our federal judiciary. Read Franken’s history of this process, and what Democrats should do next, in “How Ending the Blue Slip Damaged the Federal Courts Forever” on Democracy Docket.
In our second Spotlight, Karundi Williams, a national organizer for racial justice, chronicles the dangerous path the country moves down by criminalizing the freedom to protest. Three dozen states have enacted anti-protest legislation, widely considered a direct response to the protests of 2020 that brought nearly 26 million people to the streets. Contextualized within the 58th anniversary of the March on Washington, Williams argues how this crackdown on organizing within communities of color is another example of white supremacy at work. Learn more about the oppressive laws and how communities are fighting back in “Protecting Our Voting Rights and Ability To Organize."
|
|
Ask Marc
Each week, we pick a few questions from our readers for Marc to answer. Got a question? Submit it here!
Frank asks: I saw you are starting your own law firm, congratulations!
Marc: Thank you! I am, it is very exciting. Elias Law Group will be a mission-driven firm, focused on electing Democrats, supporting voting rights and helping progressives make change. Democracy Docket will continue to be the media platform to go to stay up to date on the fight for voting rights.
Anne asks: Will the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act pass?
Marc: As it heads to the Senate, you can call your senators and ensure they support the legislation. Check out Fair Fight Action’s Stop Jim Crow 2 action center and get connected to your representative.
|
|
What Bode's Barking About
“So, the clear message to Republican legislatures is that if you engage in unconstitutional map drawing, you will be sued and you will lose.” Bloomberg Law
“Texas conservatives have a history of using poll watchers to intimidate minority groups. In 1962, in parts of Texas —as part of a national party campaign dubbed “Operation Eagle Eye” — Republicans mobilized 10,000 poll watchers to show up at voting locations in Black and Hispanic communities to challenge residents’ eligibility to vote.” Texas Standard
“North Carolina must immediately allow felons who are on parole, probation or supervised release to register to vote, a three-judge panel in a state court said Monday. The 2-1 ruling, in a state Superior Court in Raleigh, restores voting rights to a disproportionately Black group of roughly 56,000 people who are out of prison but are under some sort of supervision.” The New York Times
|
|
Like getting our exclusive recaps on all things democracy? We depend on the support of our readers to keep bringing you the latest on the fight for democracy. We can’t do this without you.
