What Happened to Voting Rights Act of 1965?

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on August 6, 1965, stands as one of the most impactful pieces of civil rights legislation in U.S. history. Its primary purpose was to enforce the 15th Amendment's guarantee that the right to vote would not be denied or abridged on account of race or color, directly addressing decades of systemic disenfranchisement of African Americans, particularly in Southern states, through measures like literacy tests, poll taxes, and intimidation. The Act's key provisions included Section 2, a nationwide prohibition against voting practices that discriminate based on race, and Section 5, which required certain jurisdictions with a history of discrimination to obtain 'preclearance' from the Department of Justice or a federal court before implementing any changes to their voting laws.

The VRA proved immensely successful in its early decades, leading to a dramatic increase in Black voter registration and representation. The disparity in registration rates between white and Black voters in covered jurisdictions dropped from nearly 30 percentage points in the early 1960s to 8 percentage points just a decade later. Congress reauthorized the Act multiple times with overwhelming bipartisan support, including in 1970, 1975, 1982, and most recently in 2006, expanding its protections to include language minorities and making the ban on 'tests or devices' permanent nationwide.

A significant turning point occurred on June 25, 2013, with the Supreme Court's decision in Shelby County v. Holder. In a 5-4 ruling, the Court struck down Section 4(b) of the VRA, which contained the formula used to determine which jurisdictions were subject to Section 5's preclearance requirement. While the Court did not strike down Section 5 itself, it rendered it unenforceable by eliminating its coverage formula. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg famously dissented, stating that eliminating preclearance due to a lack of evidence of discrimination was like "throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet." The immediate consequence was a wave of restrictive voting laws in states previously covered by Section 5, including strict voter ID laws and changes to early voting and registration procedures.

Further erosion of the VRA's protections continued with the 2021 Supreme Court decision in Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, which made it more difficult to win lawsuits challenging discriminatory voting laws under Section 2. Although the Court reaffirmed Section 2's use in redistricting cases in Allen v. Milligan in 2023, the most recent and arguably devastating blow came on April 29, 2026, with the 6-3 Supreme Court ruling in Louisiana v. Callais. This decision severely weakened Section 2, particularly concerning challenges to racially discriminatory redistricting maps, making it "all but impossible" for plaintiffs to succeed in such cases. Justice Elena Kagan, in her dissent, warned that the ruling would allow states to "systematically dilute minority citizens' voting power" and could lead to a sharp decline in minority representation.

As of June 23, 2026, the Voting Rights Act is significantly weakened, with its primary enforcement mechanisms either eliminated or severely curtailed by judicial decisions. States like Tennessee, Florida, and South Carolina have already begun redrawing congressional maps in the wake of the Callais decision, potentially impacting minority representation. In response, there is an ongoing push in Congress for the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, which aims to restore and modernize the VRA's protections, including a new preclearance formula and strengthened Section 2. However, this legislation has faced significant hurdles in the Senate. Concurrently, some states, like New Jersey, are passing their own state-level voting rights acts to incorporate federal protections into state law and prevent discriminatory voting changes. The current landscape indicates a fragmented and challenging environment for voting rights, with federal protections at their weakest in decades and the future largely dependent on legislative action or further judicial interpretations.