This Congregation Could Have Kept Silent About The Court’s Decision. Instead, They Chose To Sing.
In some states, it used to be REALLY REALLY hard to vote*. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 helped end that. But in 2013, the Supreme Court dismantled a lot of that law.This congregation, whose pastor was killed marching for the Voting Rights Act, disagrees with the Supreme Court undoing what their friend died for. They don’t think we’re done making equality happen. They could’ve responded with a protest ... or nothing at all. But they chose to respond in an entirely different way.
*Just one example of how difficult it was for some folks to vote is Rosanell Eaton, who, in 1940, was forced to recite the entire preamble of the Constitution after a two-hour mule ride. She did it.
MORE DETAILS TIME:
It’s hard to understand what’s going on with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 after the 2013 Supreme Court decision *technically* struck down only ONE section (Section 4). But that section affects the entire act.
Without Section 4, the Justice Department has fewer legal ways to challenge election laws in specific states if it thinks those laws might be discriminatory. So it's harder to make discriminatory (racist-y) laws go away now. There’s more in this detailed Washington Post article.
So now that section 4 is gone, it’s up to the states to regulate themselves, basically. And if you ask me, these states are not doing a good job of NOT discriminating now that there's little legal recourse. Actually, if you ask the facts (not me), most of these states are doing a better job of discriminating MORE. So far, 15 states have legislated rules making it more difficult to vote. And most of those 15 states are facing legal action to strike down these new laws — even though it's now harder to make those laws go away.
Anyway, you know who makes the laws. People you vote for. Just sayin’.