Your weekly source for analysis and insight from experts at the Brennan Center for Justice
([link removed])
With the addition of Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) as co-sponsors, a majority of the Senate now supports the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
Similarly, a majority supports, and has voted for, the Freedom to Vote Act, which would establish national standards on voting, redistricting, and campaign finance.
These bills are extraordinarily important. They are vital to defend our democracy from the assault it faces — critical to ensure that elections are free and fair, critical to ensure that we do not choke off our emerging multiracial democracy.
The choice before the Senate, then, is rather stark: voting rights or obstruction.
Murkowski’s support is greatly welcomed. She has supported the John Lewis Voting Rights Act before. But the central fact is that these vital pieces of legislation have run into a brick wall of partisan obstruction by the Senate Republican minority. That minority will not even allow a vote.
That partisan divide was not always the norm. The last time the 1965 Voting Rights Act was considered for renewal by the Senate, in 2006, it passed 98–0.
There are ways to move these bills to a final vote without jettisoning the filibuster, ways that preserve the Senate’s cherished (if somewhat illusory) values of debate and conciliation. The filibuster in this instance does not facilitate compromise or conciliation. It allows a minority to block needed legislation. The Senate has found many ways to ease passage of vital legislation despite Senate rules. This is such a time, and the stakes are that high.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was perhaps the most effective civil rights law in American history. It changed the South, and the country. By 2012, Black voter turnout had equaled or exceeded white voter turnout in states like Louisiana, Alabama, and South Carolina. Everyone, everyone, agreed that the Voting Rights Act worked.
In 2013, however, the Supreme Court triggered the collapse of that consensus. In Shelby County v. Holder, five justices ruled that the Voting Rights Act was outdated, and they eviscerated its protections. The four dissenting justices predicted the decision would allow the return of discriminatory voting laws.
The dissenters were right. This year alone, 19 states have passed dozens of laws making it harder to vote. Many of those states would have been required to seek federal permission had the Voting Rights Act stood.
These restrictive new laws have disproportionately impacted voters of color. Steady gains in Black voting rates have been reversed
([link removed])
. In most of the states where Black voter turnout had surged prior to Shelby County, white voter turnout rates once again far exceed rates for Black voters. It’s difficult to imagine more powerful empirical evidence that the original safeguards of the Voting Rights Act remain necessary.
The Senate will vote on advancing the John Lewis Voting Rights Act tomorrow. We expect it to garner a majority — a majority that represents a major step toward the broad, longstanding public consensus that voting rights and equality under the law are sacred in the United States. That majority must, one way or another, rule on this most crucial of issues.
Democracy
Racial Gerrymandering in the Lone Star State
With the last decade’s attempts at racially gerrymandered maps having been struck down in court, one might expect Texas Republicans to exercise more caution in 2021 — yet their proposed maps once again have communities of color in the crosshairs. Julia Boland, Peter Miller, and Michael Li use a newly redrawn voting district near Fort Worth to illustrate the extent and surgical precision of this latest effort to erase the population gains of minority groups. “It is more critical than ever that new maps provide communities of color with a seat at the table. The plan signed by Gov. Greg Abbott does not achieve this goal and should be seen for what it is: an effort to move the state backwards, not forwards,” they write. Read more
([link removed])
Constitution
Facebook’s Ban List and the First Amendment
The sheer size of Facebook’s user base translates into outsize impact from its content moderation policies. A whistleblower recently leaked the list of people and groups held to the site’s Dangerous Individuals and Organizations Community Standards. It turns out the company has gone well past its legal obligations, sanctioning many who are not designated by the U.S. government as threats. The implications for freedom of speech are sizable. “In order to have an honest dialogue about these tradeoffs and who bears the brunt of its content moderation decisions, Facebook needs to set aside the distracting fiction that U.S. law requires its current approach,” Faiza Patel and Mary Pat Dwyer write. JUST SECURITY
([link removed]
Fellows
Reforming the Presidential Nomination Process
The process for how parties select their presidential candidates is so rife with problems that it’s difficult to even consider how to change the process. Walter Shapiro provides an incisive history of the presidential system as it’s changed through the years and offers up a slate of ideas for reform. He argues that the time for improvement is now, in the space between presidential campaign cycles and before any alterations can be construed to be for a given candidate’s benefit. “At a time of rightful fear over the future of American democracy, it would be bracing to solve over the next year or two fixable problems in how the nation nominates would-be presidents,” he writes. Read more
([link removed])
Lynching Must Become a Federal Crime
The House first passed a bill to ban lynching in 1922. Ted Johnson delivers a thorough history of a century of trying to federally ban this abhorrent crime, topped with an impassioned plea for Congress to finish the job it started nearly a century ago. After nearly 250 attempts, all defeated or stalled via filibuster or adjournment, the time for action is now. “There is a marked difference between a society that explicitly outlaws a crime of racial hatred designed to strip the humanity of a people and violently enforce racial inequality and one that falls silent on the matter,” he writes. WASHINGTON POST
([link removed])
Coming Up
VIRTUAL EVENT: The Midterms: What to Expect Next November and Beyond
([link removed])
Thursday, November 4, 5–6 p.m. ET
Midterm elections always matter — but in this divided era, at a critical junction for countless policy areas, the 2022 midterms will matter more than most. From the role of primary voters to what issues will bring voters to the polls, hear early insights from some of the best in the business: Alex Castellanos, a strategist for the Bush-Cheney and Romney campaigns and co-founder of Purple Strategies; Stephanie Cutter, Obama White House staffer and founding partner of Precision; and Shailagh Murray, former Washington Post reporter and deputy chief of staff to then-Vice President Biden. The conversation will be moderated by Bakari Sellers, CNN political analyst and former U.S. Representative, South Carolina (D). RSVP today
([link removed])
Produced in partnership with New York University's John Brademas Center
VIRTUAL EVENT: Inside American Politics 2021
([link removed])
Friday, November 5, 2–5:30 p.m. ET
Political experts and strategists join the John Brademas Center and the Brennan Center for a series of dialogues to discuss President Biden's agenda, the current state of the GOP, looking ahead to the 2024 presidential election, and the current political landscape in Washington. RSVP today
([link removed])
Produced in partnership with New York University's John Brademas Center
Want to keep up with Brennan Center Live events? Subscribe to the events newsletter.
([link removed])
News
John Kowal and Wilfred Codrington III on constitutional change // WOSU NEWS
([link removed])
Michael Li on redistricting reform in Virginia // SLATE
([link removed])
Lawrence Norden on baseless fraud claims in today’s Virginia election // WASHINGTON POST
([link removed])
Yurij Rudensky on prison gerrymandering // AP NEWS
([link removed])
Feedback on this newsletter? Email us at
[email protected]
([link removed])
Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law
120 Broadway, Suite 1750 New York, NY 10271
646-292-8310
tel:646-292-8310
[email protected]
Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences
[link removed]
Want to stop receiving these emails? Click here to unsubscribe
[link removed]
