What is the Voting Rights Act, the 1965 law that changed America — and why it's back in the spotlight now

Time of India

11-07-2025

The Supreme Court is revisiting the Voting Rights Act, potentially altering safeguards against discriminatory voting maps. Justice Clarence Thomas, holding long-standing concerns that the VRA exacerbates racial tensions, finds support among conservative justices. A Louisiana redistricting case, challenging the creation of Black-majority districts, highlights the court's re-evaluation of the VRA's scope and private individuals' ability to sue under it.
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Why is the Supreme Court taking another look at the VRA?
What's the Louisiana case about?
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Why is Justice Clarence Thomas against it?
Are other justices agreeing with Thomas?
Can individuals and advocacy groups still sue under the VRA?
FAQs
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
The Supreme Court is revisiting the Voting Rights Act (VRA), a landmark 1965 law, it is a law that prevents practices that deny Blacks, Hispanics and other racial minorities an equal chance to vote, as per a report. Justice Clarence Thomas has long argued against a key part of the VRA because he believes that it worsens racial tensions, as reported by CNN. Justice Thomas first voiced his concerns in 1994, but back then, colleagues considered his position "radical," according to the report. Only Justice Antonin Scalia agreed with him, as per CNN.Now, with more conservative justices in the court, views of Thomas, a conservative African American, have gained traction, reported CNN.ALSO READ: Are you 65 or older? You could get a $6,000 bonus tax deduction under Trump's new law Louisiana redistricting case order from the high court "suggests that it is seriously reconsidering the scope of VRA safeguards against congressional and state legislative district maps that dilute minority votes," wrote CNN in its report.The current dispute involves a Louisiana redistricting map as a US district court found Louisiana's original 2022 map, with a single Black-majority district, which denied Black voters an equal opportunity to elect their preferred candidates, as reported by CNN. Black people make up about one-third of Louisiana's population, and the state redrew the map to create two Black-majority districts , as per the report. However, a group of mostly White voters sued, saying that the state legislature unconstitutionally created a racial gerrymander and adopted some of Thomas' arguments, as reported by CNN.The Supreme Court will rehear the Louisiana case in the upcoming session that begins in October, and said that they would issue a subsequent order regarding additional grounds to be covered, according to a report. This is a rare move for the justices to order a new argument in a controversy, but when they do, the move tends to expand the possible consequences, as reported by CNN.ALSO READ: 7 anti-aging superfoods scientists swear by for a sharper brain in your 70s Justice Thomas dissented, wanting the court to rule that Section 2 of the VRA is unconstitutional, according to the report. Section 2 requires considering race to ensure fair voting districts as Thomas wrote, 'I am hopeful that this Court will soon realize that the conflict its Section 2 jurisprudence has sown with the Constitution is too severe to ignore,' quoted CNN.Thomas believes the VRA has become a tool for "regulating, rationing, and apportioning political power among racial and ethnic groups," as quoted by CNN. He added, 'In short, few devices could be better designed to exacerbate racial tensions than the consciously segregated districting system currently being constructed in the name of the Voting Rights Act,' as quoted in the report.Other conservative justices have echoed Thomas' concerns, like Justice Neil Gorsuch has called the court's voting rights jurisprudence a "disastrous misadventure," while Justices Samuel Alito and Amy Coney Barrett have also pressed for a "race neutral" approach, as per the report.Another issue is whether private individuals can sue under Section 2 of the VRA, as the 8th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that only the Justice Department can bring such claims, according to the report. This contradicts other lower courts and lawyers for Native American tribes are appealing this decision to the Supreme Court, reported CNN.Because the Supreme Court is reviewing parts of it, and its decision could change how voting rights are protected, especially for people of color, as per the CNN report.He believes using race to draw voting maps causes more racial tension instead of solving it — and that the law no longer fits today's America.