The American Independent provides a discussion on the Shelby County, Alabama challenge to Section 5 and 4b of the VRA and its potential implications on Texas Voter ID and other covered jurisdiction’s voting changes if the federal judge finds part of the VRA unconstitutional.  The same question can be asked about the pending court opinion’s potential impact on the redistricting process across the nation as the cost of submission of redistricting plans and litigation by states and counties covered by Section 5 loom ahead.  These litigation costs would argue for quick resolution by the courts before such expenses are incurred in the redistricting cycle.  If the 46 year old coverage formula and Section 5 preclearance requirement is found unconstitutional, it is only fair the issue be resolved with some finality before millions are spent in submission and litigation costs.

The Fredericksburg Patch quotes civil rights attorney Gerry Hebert as stating the preclearance process skirts the limits of the Constitution: “This process raises serious constitutional concerns via the concept of federalism and the separation of federal and state powers,” said Herbert, who cited recent court cases challenging the constitutionality of preclearance winding their way through appeals courts. “It will likely be held unconstitutional by the Supreme Court we have now because the formula has never been updated since 1964. If your state had a poll tax and if in 1964’s presidential election, if less than 50 percent who were registered to vote, or 50 percent of the voting age population didn’t vote in that election, then you’d be subject to [preclearance]”