Gonzales Supports Renewal of Voting Rights Act. Does Roberts?
by TChris
Alberto Gonzales, speaking for the Bush administration, has taken a surprisingly rational position that won't find support among right wing extremists who have labored to make it difficult to vote:
The Voting Rights Act has been one of the most successful pieces of civil rights legislation ever enacted and should be reauthorized, U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Tuesday.
...
He said particular emphasis has been placed on requirements that election materials be translated for voters who speak English as a second language. The department has filed more cases on the minority-language provisions in the past four years than in the previous 26 years those requirements applied.
"Right here in Texas, in Harris County, turnout among Vietnamese eligible voters doubled following Justice Department efforts," Gonzales said.
Boston is among the cities that, according to the Justice Department, have failed to translate ballots adequately.
Some enforcement provisions of the Act -- including "a provision that forces a number of mostly Southern states and counties to get pre-approval from Washington before changing voting times, places or methods" -- are up for renewal in 2007.
Richard Hasen questions whether Supreme Court nominee John Roberts supports the goals of the Voting Rights Act. Roberts unsuccessfully opposed an amendment to the law that allowed vote dilution claims to proceed in the absence of evidence that discrimination against a class of voters was intentional.
In the Reagan administration at that time was a 27-year-old lawyer named John Roberts. As a special assistant to Atty. Gen. William French Smith, Roberts was a major force behind the administration's efforts to oppose the new Section 2, according to newly released papers. He drafted Op-Ed articles, questions and answers for senators and documents aimed at defeating the new Section 2.
In these documents, Roberts wrote that the new Section 2 would "establish a quota system" and "provide a basis for the most intrusive interference imaginable by federal courts into state and local processes." He added that it "would be difficult to conceive of a more drastic alteration of local government affairs.
Hasen wonders whether Roberts would vote to uphold the Act against a challenge that Congress has invaded the province of the states. In light of Roberts' writings, the issue should be explored at his confirmation hearing.
| < 14 Marines, Interpreter and Journalist Killed in Iraq | Teachers' Group Assails Bush on Intelligent Design > |
