(Photo : Pexels/ Edmond Dantès)

The Unprecedented Alarm from the 8th Circuit

In a startling turn of events, the least diverse federal appellate court - the 8th U.S. Circuit - has sounded a clear warning to the Supreme Court in a bid to immobilize the Voting Rights Act (VRA). For the first time in the VRA's 58-year history, the 8th Circuit has suggested such matters solely belong to the variable and resource-dependent Department of Justice. This prospect flies in the face of Congressional legislative history and Supreme Court opinions.

The Inherent Tug-of-War in the Judiciary

This boundary-pushing move by the 8th Circuit strangely contrasts the stance of the 5th Circuit, the country's most conservative appellate court. The latter declined to follow in the 8th Circuit's steps despite compelling arguments from strongly ideologically oriented conservative justices.

Consequently, the stage is set for the Supreme Court to continue its mission since the pivotal Shelby v. Holder decision of 2013.

ALSO READ: Elon Musk Allegedly Misleads Neuralink Investors, U.S. Lawmakers Call SEC to Investigate

Potential Consequences Await, and They Are Not Small

Should the Supreme Court align with the 8th Circuit, the doors could swing open for nationwide effects. In particular, the coarse fabric of minority voters' power to oppose discriminatory voting laws, as well as Congress' characteristic drive to safeguard minority voters, risks unraveling.

The reasoning of the 8th Circuit contends that Section 2 of the VRA does not encompass appropriate "rights-creating language," thus undermining the right of individuals to initiate legal action, despite Section 2's explicit mention of the "right to vote."

A Poisoned Chalice for Underserved Voters

The fallout from this ongoing drama may well lead to millions of Black and brown voters, those whom the VRA was designed to protect, being shut out of the courtroom. To fill this void, minority voters must lean on the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments that necessitate substantial proof of discriminatory intent, an onerous measure compared to Section 2's requirements.

Furthermore, without backing from nonprofits and private plaintiffs dedicated to equal representation and democratic principles, the burden could fall on the Biden administration's Department of Justice to bring lawsuits despite its ideologically influenced reservations.

Ignoring Precedents and Congress' Intent

The 8th Circuit's decision sits awkwardly with past precedents favoring a private right of action to execute Section 2. Furthermore, it contrasts with Congressional intent, evidenced by the extensive legislative history of the VRA and its successive bipartisan reauthorizations, which affirm the Act's enforcement not just by the federal government, but also by "aggrieved private parties."

Time for Bipartisan Congressional Action

With the bracing drive towards more inclusive voter access by both major political parties, this could be the moment for Congress to clarify Section 2 and untangle the Gordian knot of legal complexities tied by the controversial 8th Circuit decision.

The Power of Expert Legal Help

In this critical juncture, expert legal help should be emphasized. Legal professionals can provide the necessary guidance to navigate a complex legal landscape and significantly impact the protection of voting rights. Let's remember that our collective strength in safeguarding democratic principles lies in the hands of every citizen, bolstered by the expert knowledge and dedication of the legal community. Reach out to a legal professional today, and let's keep our democracy strong!

RELATED TOPIC: Ex-Obama Admin Official Faces Charges for Islamophobic Taunts Targeting NYC Vendor

Tags

Congress Preemptive Action, Voting Rights Act

© 2023 Lawyer Herald All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.