Should Congress implement federal government oversight of elections for states with a history of voter suppression?
The John Lewis Voting Rights Act seeks to restore provisions in the 1965 Voting Rights Act that have since been removed from the bill. Most significantly, H.R. 4 restores the “pre-clearance” regime that the Supreme Court struck down in the 2013 case Shelby V. Holder. Under this regime, the United States Department of Justice would use a formula to determine which states have an unacceptable level of voting rights violations over the course of the past 25 years. These states would then have to submit changes in their voting rights laws to the Department of Justice for “pre-clearance” before their implementation. States placed under DOJ supervision would then have to demonstrate 10 years of fair elections before being removed from supervision. In addition, the bill would require reasonable public notice for voting law changes and allow the DOJ to send federal inspectors to the polls.
Sponsor: Rep. Terri Sewell (Democrat, Alabama, District 7)
View full bill text ➔
How do you feel?
Oppose
Support
Opponents say
• "The bill’s biggest aim is to revive part of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), which forced certain states and localities to get federal “preclearance” before altering election rules. The law helped to break Jim Crow in the South, but that was a different age. Preclearance was supposed to last five years. Congress has extended it to 2031, without revising the 1975 criteria that determined which states were covered. This old formula is what the Supreme Court struck down in Shelby County v. Holder (2013). As Chief Justice John Roberts explained, black voter registration before the VRA was 6.4% in Mississippi. By 2004 it was 76.1%, higher than among whites. The VRA’s formula, he said, bore ‘no logical relation to the present day.’" Source: The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board
• "The voting rights bill is intact. The law extends well into the future. What this rewrite of it does is grant the Justice Department almost total ability to determine the voting systems of states in America - which they’re trying to achieve indirectly through this rewrite of the voting rights act. The Supreme Court did not strike down the voting rights act. They struck down the preclearance part of it that applied only to the Southern part of the United States because the Supreme Court ruled that the conditions that existed in 1965 no longer exist. So there is no voter suppression." Source: Sen. Mitch McConnell (Republican, Kentucky)
• "The bill would attempt to overturn the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby v. Holder, which struck down the section 4(b) formula for utilizing Section 5 of the voting rights act … unelected officials at the DOJ would have veto power over good-faith decisions made by state and local governments without ever needing a justification." Source: Rep. Claudia Tenney (Republican, New York, District 22) and 12 other members of the House Republican Caucus
Proponents say
• "A brazen, partisan campaign of voter suppression silences voters of color across the nation and threatens to erode our democracy. Further, the Supreme Court’s disastrous decision in Shelby v. Holder opened the floodgates of voter suppression, allowing states with dark histories of bigotry and discrimination to pass hundreds of laws designed to keep communities of color from the ballot box. This year alone, eighteen states have enacted thirty dangerous voter suppression laws, while the Court has continued its assault on the Voting Rights Act with its shameful decision in Brnovich v. DNC. With the attack on the franchise escalating and states beginning the process of redistricting, we must act. When the House returns on August 23rd, Democrats plan to pass H.R. 4 – and we hope it can secure the bipartisan support this vital legislation deserves." Source: Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California, District 12)
• "The right to vote is the most sacred and fundamental right we enjoy as American citizens and one that the Foot Soldiers fought, bled, and died for in my hometown of Selma, Alabama. Today, old battles have become new again as we face the most pernicious assault on the right to vote in generations. By preventing states with a recent history of voter discrimination from restricting the right to vote, this bill restores the full promise of our democracy and advances the legacy of those brave Foot Soldiers like John Lewis who dedicated their lives for the sacred right to vote. " Source: Rep. Terri Sewell (Democrat, Alabama, District 7)
• "Instead of answering our concerns for him (late Rep. John Lewis), he asked us to remain focused on the unfinished work – his life’s work – of healing and uniting this nation. [That] means continuing the cause that John was willing to give his life for: protecting the sacred right to vote. Not since the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s have we seen such unrelenting attacks on voting rights and the integrity of our elections – from the Big Lie to the insurrection on January 6th to the new waves of voter suppression and a new front of election subversion." Source: President Joe Biden (President of the United States)
- Rep. Sewell Introduces H.R. 4, the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, to Restore Protections of the Voting Rights Act
- Congressional Democrats take a machete to the Supreme Court's election jurisprudence in voting rights bill (Business Insider)
- Can Democrats Move Forward A Voting Rights Bill By Making A Moral Case For It? (FiveThirty-Eight)
- How is the John Lewis Voting Rights Act different from H.R. 1? (The Washington Post)
