NAMUDNO vs. VRA ends in a draw

You just have to wonder. The case that posed the biggest threat to the Voting Rights Act for decades has been decided - and the Supremes have elected to punt.

(Via SCOTUS blog)

With only one Justice voting to strike down Congress’s 25-year extension of the Voting Rights Act’s controversial Section 5, the Supreme Court on Monday interpreted the law in a way that saves it.  The Court said that all local units of government must be given the option to bail out of the requirement that they get Washington approval for any changes in their election laws or methods.

So, rather than hold Section 5 underwater until it dies - they've merely chosen to dangle its head over the water and ask people to load it up with heavy objects.

Oh, and Justice Thomas thought the court should have nullified Section 5, since-

...the violence, intimidation and subterfuge” that led to its enactment “no longer remains.”

True, there are no stats to show how many attempts to disenfranchise voters were never attempted under the VRA - but I imagine we'll get some stats as soon as more districts escape federal oversight.

Weak.

SCOTUS blog's Tom Goldstein has a similar view, although he's thinking Section 5 is drowning a lot faster than I do (and, in contrast to my opinion, he actually knows stuff).