Today the Supreme Court decided to strike down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 which gave congress the power to review states with histories of race discrimination before they changed their voting laws. They found that this was unconstitutional and that the states had the right to decide whatever they wanted about voting laws. The thing is, that voting is a right, not a privilege and a right that must be afforded to all. Immediately after the decision states started putting in place new voter ID laws which inherently discriminates against minorities, people in poverty, and the elderly by requiring voters to display photo ID before making their trip into the booths. Many people cant afford these IDs, have no residence to tie them to and so many other complications that have arisen from such laws. They tried to enact one of these laws in Pennsylvania in 2012 for the presidential elections but pulled it at the last minute because of controversy.
The vote in this case was 5-4 with the majority including all the conservative justices, including chief justice John Roberts and Clarence Thomas. The latter vote confuses me because as a person of color, Justice Thomas should realize the implications this decision could have on communities of color. He should also realize why this law was created in the first place, to protect African Americans from the voting discrimination such as the literacy tests that they were forced to take in order to register to vote. When I was younger, I learned about freedom summer in 1964 when thousands went down to the south to register people of color to vote. I wonder if something like this could happen again now that the Voting Rights Act has essentially been gutted.
I have no expectations about what will happen tomorrow with the vote on DOMA and Prop 8. Even though gay marriage is an issue I am not fiercely passionate about, I still support the cause because I know that there are many rights denied to couples who aren't married.
In addition the Supreme Court made another decision today in the case of baby girl vs. adoptive couple in which they bypassed the ruling of a South Carolina court which gave custody of a baby girl to her biological father in lieu of a couple that had raised her since birth. The interesting thing about this case is that the father was part of the Cherokee nation of Oklahoma who ruled as a sovereign state that this girl was also part of their nation. The Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 was written to curb the adoption of native children by non native parents, hoping to end the troubling trend that had been started when america put native children in homes and boarding schools in order to make them more civilized. The court ruled that the father would not have custody of his child because the child was only a tiny fraction Cherokee. However, the Cherokee nation does not decide the identity of the child based on genetics but rather on what the tribal council thinks. The council ruled that the child was considered part of their nation, therefore the supreme court was undermining their authority to decide such things when they issued their ruling today. This could have a wide impact on many native children who are being ripped from their tribes because of their adoption by non native couples. Its just another way we are slowly expelling native Americans from this country.
Ultimately, I don't think the Supreme Court will rule positively in any case until we have more liberal justices. In this current configuration, conservatives always win and will continue to do so.
