February 25, 2013
On
Wednesday, February 27, 2013, the United States Supreme Court heard
Shelby County v. Holder (docket 12-96), a case testing
the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of
1965.The Voting Rights Act is hailed as one of the most important
civil rights laws in the country. Section 5 of the Act is now being
challenged under the 10th Amendment, which protects the sovereignty
of states by preserving their rights of self-government; the 15th
Amendment, which gives Congress authority to pass laws to end the
denial of voting rights based on race; the 14th Amendment, which
guarantees legal equality; and Article IV, which gives each state
the power to govern itself without excessive interference from the
national government.
Janai S. Nelson, Associate Professor of Law and the Associate
Director of the Ronald H. Brown Center for Civil Rights and
Economic Development at the Law School, submitted an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief for the
Supreme Court to consider in the Shelby County case.
Professor Nelson is part of a group of election law scholars who
have written about the Voting Rights Act and argue in their brief
that the Supreme Court should uphold Section 5 as part of
Congress’s authority under the Elections Clause of the U.S.
Constitution, in addition to Congress’s enforcement powers under
the 14th and 15th Amendments. The most recent in a long line of
decisions which have upheld the Act, Shelby County will be
decided by a Court that has already expressed doubt about Section
5’s constitutionality in a previous case, NAMUDNO
v. Holder.
“The Shelby County case is very significant not just in
terms of voting rights but for civil rights and racial equality
more broadly.” Professor Nelson says, “Without Section 5,
jurisdictions with a documented history of racial discrimination in
voting will no longer be required to submit new voting laws to the
federal government for approval to ensure that minority voting
rights are protected. In short, much of the progress the Voting
Rights Act enabled could be upended by the Court if it chooses to
strike down Section 5.”
Professor Nelson sees her participation in this case as a
natural outgrowth of the expertise in the Voting Rights Act she
developed as the former Director of Political Participation at the
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., and in her current
election law scholarship on race and democracy. As the Law School’s
inaugural
Granito Scholar, Professor Nelson took a one-semester leave
from teaching in 2012 to pursue her Voting Rights Act research and
scholarship.