The supreme court might kill voting rights-quietly by Tobias Watters https://padlet.com/tobiasw2025/buea6da5ymr3ixb0 en-us 2021-10-19 15:40:02 UTC 2025-12-30 16:16:58 UTC hello@padlet.com Voting rights: tobiasw2025 https://padlet.com/tobiasw2025/buea6da5ymr3ixb0/wish/1827670546 A democracy isn't a democracy without the right to vote, if people can't vote then the people don't have any say over the laws that govern them.]]> 2021-10-19 15:45:49 UTC https://padlet.com/tobiasw2025/buea6da5ymr3ixb0/wish/1827670546 summary tobiasw2025 https://padlet.com/tobiasw2025/buea6da5ymr3ixb0/wish/1827970226 Section 2 of the voting rights act has been a target of the conservatives because it contains what's known as the "result test". The result test prohibits state electoral regulation that "results in a denial of abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race." 
In other words this means that instead of the law looking for inequalities in the results of voting laws they re targeting the intent of the laws. 
The republican national committee was not happy about the result test, they claimed that the result test unlawfully changed the amendment and crossed over the congress's power when it comes to voting rights. They claimed that the states have lost their rights to decide how they deal with elections.
There were many lawsuits against the US, mostly from the national republican committee, the court never really agreed with them though. section two of the voting rights act stayed the same. 
But if you take a closer look at, the transcripts, Justices Alito and Barrett, seem mildly aposed toe ht results test. They also seem "uncomfortable with the fact that the results test requires courts tot take into account centuries of slavery and anti-black racism that robbed black people of wealth..." 
Chief Justice Roberts and others suggested that the results test does not prevent states from legislating to address voter fraud.

In conclusion The supreme court seems poised to hollow out what little remains of the voting rights act. This wouldn't be with a major constitution pronouncement, but with smaller complex laws.
]]> 2021-10-19 17:20:47 UTC https://padlet.com/tobiasw2025/buea6da5ymr3ixb0/wish/1827970226 Article and authors name; tobiasw2025 https://padlet.com/tobiasw2025/buea6da5ymr3ixb0/wish/1834267434 The supreme court might kill voting rights-quietly
Written by David H. Gans

]]> 2021-10-21 17:25:15 UTC https://padlet.com/tobiasw2025/buea6da5ymr3ixb0/wish/1834267434 How is it connected to the constitution tobiasw2025 https://padlet.com/tobiasw2025/buea6da5ymr3ixb0/wish/1834336852 In the bill of rights, it clearly states that sates and local governments have to power to hold their election how they want. The voting rights act is already impeeding on the states right a bit, but to most of the republican party, the "result tests" which is a part of section 2, goes to far and in the words of justice Samuel Alito, "every ruling" would be "vulnerable to attack under Section 2". 
They do raise a good point, but most Americans would argue that to achieve the perfect American democracy, respecting and improving voter's rights is much more important than respecting the constitution.]]> 2021-10-21 17:53:42 UTC https://padlet.com/tobiasw2025/buea6da5ymr3ixb0/wish/1834336852 Why is this issue controversial? And Analysis of how the article demonstrates the relevance of the U.S. Constitution in today's society. tobiasw2025 https://padlet.com/tobiasw2025/buea6da5ymr3ixb0/wish/1834351290 A democracy isn't a democracy with out equal voting rights. This issue raises the question, is it more important to respect voting equality, or the constitution? Any decission made by the supreme court could be really bad, if they decide to reign back the voting rights act, we would vulnerable to racial inequalities, and if the supreme court decides to make keep section 2 of the voting rights act we could disrespecting the constitution.]]> 2021-10-21 17:59:41 UTC https://padlet.com/tobiasw2025/buea6da5ymr3ixb0/wish/1834351290