National Impact of Voting Rights Legislation
The Voting Rights Act of 1965, though originally responding to Southern discrimination, has exerted influence across the entire United States according to legal analysts and research studies. Sources indicate that while the legislation grew from the African-American civil rights movement focused on Southern states, its provisions have been invoked in numerous cases outside the region.
Preclearance Requirements Reached Beyond the South
Before the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision that effectively ended the requirement, Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act mandated that jurisdictions with histories of discrimination obtain federal approval before changing voting procedures. Analysts suggest this “preclearance” requirement applied to several areas outside the South, including entire states like Alaska and Arizona, plus counties in New York, California, South Dakota, and Michigan.
Section 2 Litigation Shows Widespread Application
According to reports, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act has generated substantial litigation nationwide. Researchers at the University of Michigan found that between 1982 and 2021, there were 439 Section 2 cases resulting in published decisions, with approximately 200 originating outside Southern states. Their comprehensive study documents the provision’s broad geographic impact.
“It kind of speaks to the magnitude of the geographic impact that the Voting Rights Act had, because even beyond preclearance, there have been Voting Rights Act suits in lots of other parts of the country,” said Justin Levitt, a law professor and voting rights expert at Loyola Marymount University, according to reports.
Local Level Implementation and Minority Communities
Section 2 cases have been particularly significant at local levels, sources indicate, affecting city councils, state legislatures, and school boards. In New York’s Rockland County, civil rights groups successfully argued in 2017 that the East Ramapo Central School District’s election system prevented Black and Latino communities from electing their preferred candidates. A federal court agreed with the Section 2 claim in 2020.
The provision has proven especially important for Native American communities. In North Dakota, the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians case challenges the state legislative map for allegedly diluting Native American voting power. Meanwhile, Montana’s Blackfeet Nation successfully used Section 2 in 2020 to challenge limited ballot drop-off locations across their reservation, which is larger than Delaware.
Broader Legal and Geographic Implications
Between 1982 and 2005, a New York Times study found that Montana and South Dakota lost or settled more than five Section 2 cases each, while New Mexico resolved at least three. Legal experts suggest these numbers demonstrate how voting rights issues extend far beyond the Southern states typically associated with the Civil Rights Movement.
The ongoing legal significance of Section 2 continues to evolve as courts consider fundamental questions about who can bring Voting Rights Act claims. The Supreme Court is currently weighing whether private groups and individuals—as opposed to the government—can sue under the legislation in the North Dakota case.
This article aggregates information from publicly available sources. All trademarks and copyrights belong to their respective owners.
