Today on BradCast: Some really troubling news about voting rights and the Voting Rights Act that hasn’t received nearly enough attention since a terrible court ruling last week. [Audio link to full show follows this summary.]
FIRST UP… A few other items of note…
- If you haven’t heard, Donald Trump seems to be freaking out about something Bruce Springsteen said on stage last week when he opened his “Land of Hope and Dreams” tour in the U.K. We share a bit of what Bruce had to say, about democracy and more. “The America I love, the America I’ve written about — that has been a beacon of hope and liberty for 250 years — is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent and treasonous administration,” Springsteen correctly sounded the alarm as he opened his show. “Tonight, we ask all who believe in democracy and the best of our American experience to rise with us, raise your voices against authoritarianism, and let freedom ring.” And that’s not all he had to say. We share more.
- Speaking of democracy, after recent come-from-way-behind victories by center-left and liberal parties running against authoritarian rightwing opponents in Canada and Australia in recent weeks, it happened again on Sunday. This time in Romania, where a Trump-supporting far-right nationalist candidate who looked set to win the nation’s Presidential election just weeks ago, learned differently once voters actually showed up to cast their vote. Being a wannabe Trumper, he is, of course, claiming “fraud”, though he has failed to present any evidence so far (as I said, just like Trump.) The apparent win for the pro-European, pro-democracy candidate is also very good news indeed for neighboring Ukraine.
- On Friday, a handful of Republicans in the U.S. House who want even more cuts to health care and nutrition assistance for the nation’s neediest — including millions of children and disabled Americans — in order to help pay for huge tax cuts to the wealthy, blocked progress of Trump’s so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill” in Committee. By the time Sunday rolled around, those so-called “deficit hawks” had been brought to heel. Another Committee meeting was called to begin at 10pm on Sunday night and the measure was successfully voted out of committee, even though it would still add trillions to the nation’s debt. The measure now advances to the House floor where Speaker Mike Johnson hopes for passage before the Memorial Day recess. Thereafter, Trump’s legislative agenda heads to the U.S. Senate.
- Also last Friday, there was some good-ish news from the corrupted U.S. Supreme Court via another emergency ruling at the behest of an appeal by the Trump Administration. All Justices, other than Thomas and Alito, rejected the appeal, issuing a ruling that found the Trump Administration had failed to give appropriate Constitutional Due Process to Venezuelan migrants they are hoping to deport from Texas to El Salvador under Trump’s (mis)use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.
NEXT… While alleged Venezuelan gang members may have access to at least some Due Process to avoid unlawful removal from the country and a life sentence in an El Salvadoran gulag, American voters in at least seven states may now have no way to challenge unlawful, racially discriminatory violations of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
A ruling last week by a three-judge panel on the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the last route for private individuals and organizations in states covered by the Circuit (Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota) to hold jurisdictions accountable for violations of the Voting Right Act. The decision echoes a similar ruling by the 8th Circuit back in 2023. But last week’s ruling would seem to block the one other remaining path that voters still had to bring private complaints following that other terrible ruling two years ago.
If the 8th Circuit’s decision is allowed to stand, it would mean that only the U.S. Dept. of Justice could bring suit against violations of the last central tenet still standing from the VRA. The ruling, which my guest today describes as “dead wrong”, applies, for now, only in the seven states covered by the 8th Circuit. But if plaintiffs decide to appeal all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and lose there, it would effectively kill the entire VRA in all 50 states — at least during Republican Administrations.
JUSTIN LEVITT previously served as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice under President Obama and then as White House Senior Policy Advisor for Democracy and Voting Rights under President Biden. He is now a Professor of Constitutional Law at Loyola University Law School here in Los Angeles and joins us today to explain what he describes as last week’s “truly unprecedented” decision. (That’s the nicest thing he had to say about it!)
“They have effectively eliminated the ability to enforce the Voting Rights Act” in those seven states, Levitt tells me. “The 8th Circuit was way out of line, but it’s not a sure bet that the Supreme Court won’t follow them out of that line.”
The 8th Circuit panel determined that because the Voting Rights Act doesn’t specifically mention a private right to sue, that such suits are barred. Only DoJ can sue. But, in fact, since 1982, there have been more than 450 such suits and only 18 of them were brought by DoJ. Some made it all the way to SCOTUS and yet none of the judges in any of those cases — until now — found the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue under the law. Go figure.
“This is about people in robes forgetting why they’re there. People in love with a particular statutory interpretation methodology and forgetting that what they are supposed to be doing is effectuating the intent of Congress,” argues Levitt. The VRA has been amended several times since 1965 — under Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush — and adopted by huge majorities in both chambers of Congress. The members of Congress who amended it, and Presidents who signed the re-authorizations, “absolutely thought that the NAACP Legal Defense Fund would be bringing cases right alongside the Department of Justice and others. It’s ludicrous to think that Congress wanted anything different than that.” If they had wanted anything different, he notes, they could have changed the law to say as much at that time, since so many suits had already been brought under the law by individual voters and private voting rights organizations even before the law’s several re-authorizations.
So, what happens next? What can be done about any of this? If the case does make it to SCOTUS and they too undermine the VRA are there ANY routes left for voters to challenge racially discriminatory election laws in the U.S.? Levitt answers all of those questions and many others on today’s BradCast…
(Snail mail support to “Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028” always welcome too!)
|