 Back in 2013 the conservative majority on the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act And I don't even think a lot of people realized what happened, but they did this again last week They landed another nail in the coffin of the Voting Rights Act and this time with a larger Conservative majority and now what's left is a husk of a piece of legislation That was one of the most important civil rights bills to ever be passed in our nation's history And that's really worrying because the answer to the gutting of the Voting Rights Act before the people act All the momentum for that seems to have dissipated and now it just looks like millions of Americans Have been disenfranchised and the Supreme Court is saying That's a okay So from more on this we go to NPR's Nina Totenberg who explains the US Supreme Court Thursday gutted most of what remains Of the landmark Voting Rights Act the court's decision while leaving some protections involving redistricting in place Left close to a dead letter the law once hailed as the most effective civil rights legislation in the nation's history The 6-3 vote was a long ideological lines with just Samuel Alito writing the decision for the court's conservative majority and the liberals in angry dissent At issue in the case where two Arizona laws one banned the collection of absentee ballots by anyone other than a relative or caregiver And the other threw out any ballots cast in the wrong precinct a federal appeals court struck down both provisions Ruling that they had an unequal impact on minority voters and that there was no evidence of fraud that would have justified their use But on Thursday the Supreme Court reinstated the state laws Declaring that unequal impact on minorities in this context was relatively minor that other states have similar laws And that states don't have to wait for fraud to occur before enacting laws to prevent it just because voting may be Inconvenient for some Alito wrote doesn't mean that access to voting is unequal in Evaluating what the voting rights act requires said Alito court should look to what the voting rules were in 1982 When the relevant provision of the law was enacted back then he observed almost all voting was in person and on election day And the mere fact that there was some disparity in impact does not necessarily mean that a system is not equally open Or that it does not give everyone an equal opportunity to vote So this is absolutely Outrageous because in the majority opinion Samuel Alito admits that these laws are Inconvenient for some and yes, they know that this specifically disadvantages voters of color still Doesn't disadvantage them enough and you know these These states have a right to enact Protections to prohibit fraud even if fraud isn't taking place because stopping potential fraud is more important than Disadvantaging people making it harder to vote. This is This is a joke. I mean we need to shut down the Supreme Court until we can figure out what the hell is going on This is judicial activism like this is what conservatives have been screaming about remember when a Birch fell the Hodges was announced and you had individuals like Ted Cruz screaming about judicial activist judges This is judicial activism. This is not Something that they're arguing for based on, you know The constitutional merit of this law like this is literally just them being ideologues That's that's all that this is and I'm so sick of pretending like the Supreme Court is anything but that it's a bunch of fucking ideologues and it's a It's unbelievable I mean, I shouldn't say it's unbelievable because it is believable But it's just it's outrageous that we allow this to take place now for a brief history on The Voting Rights Act and how it was gutted and what's left because believe it or not There still is an important provision within the Voting Rights Act that is necessary. It's section 2 but I'll tell you why Just that remaining in place isn't enough if you know what we're gonna read doesn't make that clear enough on its face So the landmark law widely hailed as the most effective piece of civil rights legislation in the nation's history was Reauthorized five times after its original passage in 1965 But for all practical purposes all that is left of it now is the section banning vote dilution in Redistricting based on race and the ban on intentional discrimination Which generally applies to only the most egregious forms of discrimination Eight years ago the court by a five to four majority gut of the law's key provision Which until then required state and local governments with a history of racial discrimination and voting to get federal approval Prior to making any changes in voting procedures when that provision was struck down by the court in 2013 The only protections for voting rights that remained in the law were in section 2 though section 2 has largely been used to prevent minority vote dilution and redistricting Importantly, it does bar voting procedures that result in a denial or abridgment of the right to vote Though section 2 has largely been used to prevent minority vote dilution in redistricting Importantly, it does bar voting procedures that result in a denial or abridgment of the right of any citizen of the United States To vote on account of race or color So the Arizona case was viewed as particularly important because it was the first time the court dealt with the claim of vote denial under section 2 and how to evaluate it so section 2 remains which is important but since The Republican-led voter suppression efforts Irrespective of racialized outcomes aren't explicitly racist in the text of the laws that they pass well Doesn't apply no section 2 protections here It's just it's so purposefully obtuse That it's offensive to me So in order for a law to be unconstitutional According to the Supreme Court using their logic It would have to specifically say we do not want black people to vote But they're not going to say that in the text, but you can design a piece of legislation That will produce that outcome without explicitly saying it. That's what voter ID laws do That's what reducing the number of polling stations in poor Disproportionately communities of color does But the court is basically Pretending to be oblivious to that and I shouldn't even say that because they acknowledge that it makes voting inconvenient for some But I mean, you know not enough minority voters are affected by this and again The text doesn't say we don't want black people to vote It doesn't matter that that's the outcome and that specifically like these laws are being designed to criminalize things that specifically drove turn out in 2020 it doesn't matter They're just trying to prevent fraud and states have a right to do that voting rights act doesn't apply look This is an attack on democracy and Justices on the highest court in the land are complicit in that attack on democracy If we don't pack the courts, which is not likely then I don't know how democracy survives And I'm not trying to be purposefully hyperbolic here, but that's literally my thinking. I don't know how democracy survives when the highest court in the land Greenlights voter suppression that they know Inconveniences people of color in communities of color How does democracy advance? I mean democracy itself is a project You're always supposed to be further consolidating democracy making society more free and equitable Infranchising more people every single election cycle. That's not what's happening and the Supreme Court is saying oh well, the states have a right to a Legislate against fraud even if there is no fraud even if what they're doing is hurting people of color Yeah, it doesn't matter Section two doesn't apply unless there's a law that says that they don't want black people and brown people to vote Don't come back to us with this bullshit. It's explicitly anti-democratic and These folks on the Supreme Court are nothing but adilogs adilogs and anybody who reads this should be furious and If you read the dissenting opinion from Justice Elena Kagan She's laying out a very very clear case as to how These are unconstitutional These laws especially the one cited with Arizona. It's unconstitutional and Yet It doesn't matter. I mean look at the things here That they're trying to ban if you turn in your ballot in the wrong precinct Doesn't count the obvious goal is to diminish voting power of minorities in this country and the Supreme Court is Pretending to not know the extent to which these voter suppression laws hurt communities of color and disenfranchised communities of color and also they just don't care because you know the The means justify the ends and they just want more Republicans in power So this is what we can expect more of if Joe Biden Doesn't have the spine to at least Consider for a second it's stacking in the Supreme Court at least adding two more seats to make up for the two That Donald from stole and Republican stole Just fucking ridiculous like I'm exasperated reading the story Because it's a it's bullshit