From Selma to Shelby: Fifty Years Later
By Dr. Wayman B. Shiver, Jr.
Symbolically, “Bloody Sunday” was the people’s statement of demand for the right of all citizens to vote. However, fifty years after the pain and bloodshed at Pettus Bridge in Selma Alabama, a Supreme Court ruling negated an action, the preclearance requirement of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Civil rights advocates were stunned when the United States Supreme Court rendered this decision on June 25, 2013. Some citizen thought that the U.S. Constitution was unassailable, but with a five to four vote the justices changed fifty years of progress.
On that historical Sunday in 1965, people of all colors and all walks of life showed their courage and determination to claim what was already theirs. Thus, when five members of the highest court of the land affirmed the contentions of the Shelby County attorneys that there was no need for preclearance, there was an audible gasp of disbelief. Again, there was good reason to doubt the protection of the U.S. Constitution when it becomes a question about our rights and protections. It also seems unlikely that the welfare of the citizens of all persuasions is the overarching factor insuring the integrity of Congressional laws and the Constitution.
The political history of the southern states does not suggest that the majority of local and state governments can be trusted to do what is morally right or just. Therefore, some legal provisions must be available to prevent political officials against deciding to devise mechanism that may have the potential for planning to insure that voting outcomes are favorable to social and political ideologies.
Perhaps the rigorous constitutional scholarship exhibited by the Shelby County attorneys accounts for the regrettable fact that the U.S. Supreme Court justices struck down Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. In doing so, the key provision requiring preclearance prior to making any changes in established voting procedures was removed. Five of the Supreme Court justices concurred with Shelby County plaintiffs. In a decision of this magnitude, a 5 – 4 vote seems inadequate to trust the attorneys’ scholarship without question. Their conclusion may not be infallible. Likewise, the justices’ conclusion seems to be less than morally defensible given the political history relative to voting in the United States, especially in the Southern section of the country. At present, new provisions have been made that have the potential of deterring some citizens from voting. The gutting of the 1965 Voting Rights Act by striking down Section 5 will allow many local and state governments the time and opportunity to return to their former tactics designed specifically to control the outcomes of elections.
Since 1965, the tendency to gentrify urban areas, to develop housing communities and to reallocate the use of land have occurred at an alarming speed. In a matter of a few years, entire areas have gone from one extreme to another relative to the redistribution of identified populations. The effects are often reflected at the ballot box.
Arguably, voting is the linchpin and the anchor of American democracy as the ardent practice of voting determines who operates government processes. As shown in the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections, large numbers of committed voters can change the course of action. Although local elections are critical in a number of ways, many voters choose to vote in presidential elections only. Nonetheless, voting in all local, state and national elections is important as the demographic profile of the nation continues to change.
Increased racial and ethnic diversity changes the established order. There is no secret about gerrymandering and the act of redistricting voting lines. The coalescing of groups can influence election outcomes. The 2013 Supreme Court decision removing the preclearance provision does not guarantee that deliberate interference might not occur in the future. It depends upon the issues and the candidates.
The 5 – 4 vote also suggests that the judiciary needs an overhaul. In the opinion of this writer, the entire system of appointing and selecting justices needs serious scrutiny. For the purposes of this treatise, I contend that decisions that overturn Congressional Law need to be unanimous. Furthermore, I contend that, as is commonly believed, laws that benefit minorities directly seem to fall at the slightest suggestion.
For years, minorities have made much needed stride in office holding and jobs. The trajectory of the journey from Selma to the actual passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act was fought with many battles and obstacles. Now, fifty years after the Voting Rights Act was passed, Americans, especially African-Americans, have come full circle. Curtailment of the preclearance provision may aid and abet conservatives to revert to tactics used in days of old. There is an urgent need for civil right activists to provide oversight of elections. One sure way to influence the outcome of elections is to encourage all eligible voters to vote in all elections. Also, the voters need to be familiar with the background of each candidate.
