|
(Continued from page 21)
ernment a tool to police wayward local officials. He noted that Holder used Section 2 to go after Pennsylvania's voter ID law in a state not covered by preclearance.
• "Look," he said, "this is already happening in other states and nobody is screaming and hollering about it."
•
SD officials pleased with ruling on voting rights
CHET BROKAW,Associated Press
• PIERRE, S.D. (AP) -- South Dakota officials predicted there would be little impact on how the state writes election laws following a Supreme Court decision Tuesday striking down a key component of the Voting Rights Act, but critics expressed fear the ruling could jeopardize the rights of Native Americans in the state.
• The South Dakota counties of Todd and Shannon, which cover the Rosebud Sioux and Pine Ridge reservations, were among the few jurisdictions outside the Deep South required to get approval from the federal government before changing their voting laws. Although Tuesday's ruling doesn't strike down that provision of the landmark 1965 act, it does eliminate the requirement until Congress comes up with a new formula based on current conditions.
• State officials said at one point, South Dakota had to get approval for 3,333 state laws or rules passed over many years, but federal officials approved all of them.
• "South Dakota's laws over the past couple of years have always been approved, so it's not going to be a big change for us," Secretary of State Jason Gant, the state's top election official, said of the court decision.
• But Heather Smith of the ACLU South Dakota said the organization is disappointed with the ruling because South Dakota has a history of discriminating against Native American voters.
• "A roadblock has been put up to make voting less free and accessible," Smith said.
• All or parts of 15 states with a history of discrimination have had to get federal approval before changing the way they hold elections. South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley said the decision leaves intact a section of federal law that effectively prevents discrimination against the voting rights of minorities.
• "The nationwide law that protects against discrimination, that was never challenged. That remains good law," Jackley said.
• Jackley said lawsuits that have resulted in changes in South Dakota election laws have been based on the federal law that prevents voter discrimination, not on the law requiring advance federal approval of election law changes. The Rosebud (Continued on page 23)
|
|
