Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1777323
 


 



Judicial Activism and the Interpretation of the Voting Rights Act


Luis E. Fuentes-Rohwer


Indiana University Maurer School of Law


Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 32, No. 3, 2011
Indiana Legal Studies Research Paper No. 185

Abstract:     
From the moment the U.S. Supreme Court first confronted the difficult constitutional questions at the heart of the Voting Rights Act, its posture has been one of deference. This posture has continued to this day. In contrast, the Court has interpreted the language of the Act dynamically, often in total disregard to the text of the law or the intent of Congress. But as this Article explains, the Roberts Court appears poised to unsettle this longstanding narrative. The Act is in serious constitutional danger. One way to explain this move on the part of the Court is by invoking the post-racial storyline that has surfaced since the election of President Obama and which informs this Symposium. This is the argument that we now live in a post-racial world, a society where race no longer matters. The argument is disarmingly simple: In a world where President Obama can become president, the Voting Rights Act is no longer needed to protect minority voters from racial discrimination. This argument can be similarly applied to the Civil Rights Act and most other statutes of that era. To be sure, that is a debatable proposition, and reasonable people can disagree. Whether one agrees or not with this argument, the real question is one of epistemic authority; that is, which institution should decide whether we now live in a world where the Voting Rights Act is no longer needed? Is this a question better left to our policy-making bodies, or is this a question that we should leave to five Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court? To ask this question is to answer it. If the Supreme Court can decide this question, there is essentially little it cannot do. If striking down the Voting Rights Act on constitutional grounds is not considered judicially activist, this Article concludes, the term has ceased to have any useful meaning.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 28

Keywords: Supreme Court, judicial review, law and politics, constitutional law, legislation, race

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: March 16, 2011 ; Last revised: July 2, 2013

Suggested Citation

Fuentes-Rohwer, Luis E., Judicial Activism and the Interpretation of the Voting Rights Act. Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 32, No. 3, 2011; Indiana Legal Studies Research Paper No. 185. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1777323

Contact Information

Luis E. Fuentes-Rohwer (Contact Author)
Indiana University Maurer School of Law ( email )
211 S. Indiana Avenue
Bloomington, IN 47405
United States
812-855-5003 (Phone)
812-855-0555 (Fax)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 381
Downloads: 72
Download Rank: 194,725

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.359 seconds