Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Implementation of the Voting Rights Act

The Case of New York

Bibliographic Data

ID10876643
AuthorsRoman B Hedges (Albany State University), Roman Hedges (State University of New York at Albany), Carl P Carlucci (Baruch College)
Year1987
Volume40
Issue1
Pages107-120
Publication date1987-03-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Western Political Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0043-4078 • E-ISSN: 2325-8675
PublisherSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/106591298704000109
OpenAlexW2045813869
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited2

rT | HE VOTING RIGHTS ACT is a federal civil rights statute designed to end racial discrimination in voting. It prohibits the use of any test or device to abridge or deny any citizen of the United States the right to vote on account of race or color. Under certain, well-defined conditions, the Voting Rights Act requires that any changes in the laws governing the election of public officials must be submitted to the U.S. Justice Department for pre-clearance. The Justice Department must in turn certify that the changes do not have the effect of reducing the voting strength of minority groups protected under the Act. If the Justice Department rejects the proposed changes, it is possible to appeal the decision to the Federal Courts but the changes cannot be implemented pending the appeal. In a series of cases in the 1970s the Supreme Court defined where and how the Act would be applied. Of primary concern here, the Court confirmed the Act's application to congressional and to state legislative redistricting (Georgia v. United States, 411 U.S. 526, 1973) and ruled that districting schemes which effectively excluded minority participation would be overturned (White v. Regester, 412 U.S. 755, 1973). In Beer v. United States (S. Ct. 1357, 1976) the Court further concentrated its attention on the effects of the proposed redistricting plan and ruled that redistricting plans must provide for the non-retrogression of minority representation. While there was dissent on other issues, no justice disputed the focus of the decision on electoral outcomes. In UnitedJewish Organizations of Williamsburg v. Carey (430 U.S. 144, 1977) the Court accepted the claim that the consideration of race and of outcomes was essential to the implementation of the Voting Rights Act in regard to redistricting. The intent of the framers is reasonably clear here (Scher and Button 1984; Bullock 1984). The Voting Rights Act demands that public officials attend to the matter of protecting the interests of certain racial and ethnic minorities as regards the fundamental right to vote. It specifically constrains local political officials from designing an election system which has the effect of denying protected individuals from complete and meaningful access to the political process via the ballot box. While maximizing minority representation is not a requirement, the dilution of minority voting strength is clearly proscribed

Law and economics · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Voting · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Computer Science · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Law, Rights, and Freedoms · Public Administration

  • Minority Voting Equality

    Open Access•Kimball Brace, B Grofman et al.•Law & Policy•1988

  • Implementation of Civil Rights Policy

    Open Access•Don Brown, Charles S Bullock et al.•Journal of Policy Analysis and…•1984

  • Reapportionment and Public Policy

    Open Access•David C Saffell•Policy Studies Journal•1981

Unique citing works1
Citations per year0,03
Citation span1988 - 1988 (1)
Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae