Injustice For All: Conservative Justices Takes Aim At POC Voters

By Arturo R. García

It took less than two hours for Texas lawmakers to prove the Supreme Court made a mistake on Tuesday.

It’s also important to emphasize that it was Texas lawmakers who pushed to become the first to enact a voter identification law after the high court struck down Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

“There is no doubt that these improvements are in large part because of the Voting Rights Act. The Act has proved immensely successful at redressing racial discrimination and integrating the voting process,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the 5-4 majority decision, which broke down along party lines. So the majority’s argument was that the VRA worked too well to be allowed to continue, despite being renewed by an overwhelming margin just seven years ago, for a 25-year extension.

“Congress approached the 2006 reauthorization of the VRA with great care and seriousness. The same cannot be said of the Court’s opinion today,” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in the dissenting opinion. “The Court makes no genuine attempt to engage with the massive legislative record that Congress assembled. Instead, it relies on increases in voter registration and turnout as if that were the whole story.”

It didn’t stop with Texas, of course. And as voters in Ohio and Florida are probably aware, it will not stop with the states formerly covered by Section 5. When the likes of Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer and Rush Limbaugh feel emboldened enough to declare that racial discrimination is “over,” or had been “dealt with,” that points to something uglier.

In another 5-4 decision, the court ruled to send the case of Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl back to lower courts to decide whether the girl, Veronica Maldonado, should stay with her non-Native adopted parents or her biological father, Neither Brown, a member of the Cherokee Nation.

The South Carolina Supreme Court ruled in July 2012 that the Indian Child Welfare Act entitled Brown’s right to custody. Though Veronica’s biological mother was found to have notified adoption officials that Brown was a member of the Nation while placing her up for adoption, she also misrepresented his name and birthday to the Cherokee Nation’s child welfare division. By the time Brown was aware of the child’s existence, she was already living with the adoptive family in South Carolina. Her adoptive mother, Melanie Capobianco, testified regarding Brown’s heritage that it was “probably … something I read and didn’t think twice about it.”

These rulings followed the high court’s decision to punt on affirmative action, and Wednesday morning will bring with it rulings on both Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act. 

In closing, it’s best to listen to the words of Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), who can speak first-hand to the history Chief Justice Roberts apparently glossed over in Tuesday’s decision:

We may not have people being beaten today, maybe they’re not being denied the right to participate, to register to vote, they’re not being chased by police dogs or trampled by horses. But in the 11 states of the old Confederacy and even in some of the states outside of the South, there has been a systematic, deliberate attempt to take us back to another period.

And these men that voted to strip the Voting Rights Act of its power, they never stood in unmovable lines, they never had to pass a so-called literacy test. It took us almost a hundred years to get where we are today. So, will it take another hundred years to fix it, to change it?

About This Blog

Racialicious is a blog about the intersection of race and pop culture. Check out our daily updates on the latest celebrity gaffes, our no-holds-barred critique of questionable media representations, and of course, the inevitable Keanu Reeves John Cho newsflashes.

Latoya Peterson (DC) is the Owner and Editor (not the Founder!) of Racialicious, Arturo García (San Diego) is the Managing Editor, Andrea Plaid (NYC) is the Associate Editor. You can email us at

The founders of Racialicious are Carmen Sognonvi and Jen Chau. They are no longer with the blog. Carmen now runs Urban Martial Arts with her husband and blogs about local business. Jen can still be found at Swirl or on her personal blog. Please do not send them emails here, they are no longer affiliated with this blog.

Comments on this blog are moderated. Please read our comment moderation policy.

Use the "for:racialicious" tag in to send us tips. See here for detailed instructions.

Interested in writing for us? Check out our submissions guidelines.

Follow Us on Twitter!

Support Racialicious

The Octavia Butler Book Club

The Octavia Butler Book Club
(Click the book for the latest conversation)

Recent Comments

Feminism for Real – Jessica, Latoya, Andrea

Feminism for Real

Yes Means Yes – Latoya

Yes Means Yes

Sex Ed and Youth – Jessica

Youth and Sexual Health


Online Media Legal Network

Recent Posts

Support Racialicious

Older Archives


Written by:

  • golby260

    It was Section 4 (the denoting of which states that had to be pre-cleared) that was thrown out, although, from what I’ve been hearing, for all intents and purposes, they might as well as thrown out Section 5 (the pre-clearing itself), too; the way they got rid of 4 makes 5 for the time being almost inactionable.

  • happyappa

    DOMA was overturned just now

    Why is it so hard for white people to understand we don’t live in a post-racial society

    “despite being renewed by an overwhelming margin just seven years ago, for a 25-year extension.”

    Wasn’t this during Bush’s presidency, because Obama as president will make people wrongfully think discrimination is “over”

    Reminds me of “Subversive Learning” I saw on PBS’s Need to Know (transcript is available on their site). This white guy spent 4 years trying to take down Mexican American studies in AZ. One of his arguments was that it was apparently teaching students that US was and still is a racist country. OF COURSE IT IS, this is the truth and why shouldn’t it be taught. It should be American history.

  • 54cranberries

    This decision flies in the face of well documented problems which still exist in my state- Alaska. The Native American Rights Fund filed an Amici Curiae brief for AFN, Native voters and tribes here which clearly pointed to continued problems of the same sort Section 5 was designed to deal with. Somehow the majority on the Supreme Court were able to wave their lil hands and decide all-has-changed.

    In a state where roughly 19% of voters are Alaska Native ( the highest concentration of indigenous peoples in all of America) voter turnout in the Native community is about 17% lower than the larger community and as referenced in the NARF brief, in LEP areas a whopping 30%. These are the problems Section 5 was designed to address.

    Justice Ginsberg’s dissent is correct but given the facts here in Alaska even it falls short .
    I am disappointed beyond what I thought possible in this continuing climate of pretend post racial America.