In the landmark case, Shelby County V. Holder (2013), the US Supreme Court struck down major provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act relating to the procedure of “pre-clearance.” Since the ruling, states like Texas, Georgia and North Carolina, can now make changes to their voting laws, such as photo ID requirements, that do not need to be pre-approved by the federal government. Supporters of this ruling say the pre-clearance rules are no longer needed and besides, states need new laws to protect against voter fraud. Opponents say that these laws are just a new form of voter suppression tactics that hit the poor and racial minorities hardest. Based on this, your paper must meet the following content, format and submission requirements:
1. Describe the provisions (parts) of the Voting Rights Act that discuss the issue of “pre-clearance”.
2. Compare and contrast the views of those who think the federal government should have the power of “pre-clearance” and those who do not. Include at least three points of comparison.
3. Using evidence from any election in 2014 or later, argue whether or not you believe the federal government should have the power of “pre-clearance” relating to election laws. Include at least three reasons and/or examples to make your point.
4. List at least two things you could do in order to engage in the political process in pursuit of your position in (3) above.