Lawyers’ Committee Defends Voting Rights Act

by Jon Greenbaum

In order to defend the voting rights of millions of minority citizens, the NAACP, the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights, and the law firm of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP have requested that a federal court allow the NAACP to intervene in a challenge to the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA).

Read the Motion to Intervene here.

Read the press release here.

For 40 years, Section 5 has prevented jurisdictions that have proven track records of discrimination from continuing to marginalize traditionally targeted voters.

On August 4, 2006, the case Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Gonzales, was filed in federal district court in Washington, D.C. The plaintiff in the case, the Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One (Utility District) seeks to bailout from the preclearance approval requirements of the VRA or in the alternative obtain a ruling from the federal court that Section 5 is unconstitutional. The Utility District claims that the conditions that caused Texas to be covered by Section 5 of the VRA have been remedied. The U.S. Department of Justice is defending the case and submitted an answer to the Utility District's complaint on Monday.

In its motion to intervene, the NAACP stated its intention to fully defend the constitutionality of Section 5 of the VRA and noted its continued importance. "The NAACP worked hard to ensure passage of the VRA and we will not sit back and see it threatened anytime, anyplace," said NAACP President & CEO Bruce S. Gordon. "The NAACP will fight for the voting rights of all citizens and will demand that our government protect the rights and liberties of all people," added Gordon.

"In July, Congress reauthorized the Voting Rights Act with historic bi-partisan consensus, documenting with painstaking detail the continued need for this historic piece of legislation. If this challenge is successful, it will deprive millions of eligible Texas voters from the historic protections guaranteed by the VRA," said Barbara R. Arnwine, Executive Director of the Lawyers' Committee. "To say the VRA is no longer necessary today is dead wrong."

"The continued need for the VRA in Texas was clearly illustrated in hearings conducted by the Texas NAACP from 2001 through 2003, where we collected information about widespread voter intimidation, hate crimes, and election code violations at a variety of locations throughout the State. This is why the Texas State Conference of the NAACP and Austin Chapter of the NAACP believe it is essential that the constitutionality of Section 5 be reaffirmed," said Gary Bledsoe, President of the Texas State Conference of the NAACP Branches.

Section 5 of the VRA requires jurisdictions with a history of discrimination, like Texas, to demonstrate to federal authorities that voting changes they seek to implement do not have the purpose or effect of discriminating against minority voters. The overwhelming evidence clearly demonstrates that areas covered by the VRA, including Texas, continue to enact laws and regulations that prevent minorities from full participation in the electoral process. In fact, the State of Texas has one of the worst voting rights records in the country, trailing only Mississippi in the number of Department of Justice objections that blocked implementation of discriminatory voting changes.