How have Supreme Court rulings impacted the Voting Rights Act of 1965?
The Voting Rights Act was the most consequential civil rights statute in American history — and the religious traditions whose moral language shaped it (the civil rights movement) continue to support its protections. The Supreme Court's narrowing trajectory (Shelby 2013, Brnovich 2021, Callais 2026) has substantially weakened federal voting-rights enforcement. Congressional authority under the 15th Amendment's enforcement clause remains. Whether Congress will act to restore the protections the Court has narrowed is the central political question.
Religious perspectives
The Voting Rights Act was itself substantially the product of a religious moral movement — and its erosion raises religious-traditional questions about protecting the vulnerable from discrimination.
Christianity: Isaiah 1:17: "Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow." The civil rights movement was substantially led by Christian clergy (Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, Father James Groppi, and many others) who explicitly framed voting rights as a religious obligation. The 1965 Selma-to-Montgomery march, which directly produced the VRA, was structured as a religious witness.
Judaism: The principle of tikkun olam (repairing the world) through justice extends specifically to political structures that exclude or marginalize particular communities. American Jewish organizations were heavily involved in the civil rights movement; the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism continues to advocate for VRA restoration.
Islam: "O you who believe! Stand firmly for justice, as witnesses to God" (Quran 4:135). The principle of adl requires standing against systematic exclusion of any group from full participation.
The civil rights tradition: The religious framing of voting rights — "an American problem with a moral solution" in MLK's language — has not lost relevance. Discriminatory voting structures violate the moral framework religious traditions have spent millennia developing.
Constitutional & legal framework
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was the most consequential civil rights statute in American history. The Supreme Court has progressively narrowed it across multiple rulings.
The original VRA framework:
- Section 2: Permanent nationwide prohibition on voting practices that result in discrimination.
- Section 5 (preclearance): Required jurisdictions with histories of discrimination to obtain federal approval before changing voting rules.
- Section 4 (coverage formula): Identified which jurisdictions were subject to preclearance based on historical voting practices.
The narrowing arc:
- Shelby County v. Holder (2013): Struck down Section 4's coverage formula as outdated, effectively rendering Section 5 preclearance unenforceable. Chief Justice Roberts: "Our country has changed." Justice Ginsburg, dissenting: "Throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet."
- Brnovich v. DNC (2021): Substantially narrowed Section 2 challenges to voting procedures, making it much harder to invalidate restrictive voting rules.
- Louisiana v. Callais (April 29, 2026): Further rewrote the Section 2 test in redistricting cases, allowing state legislatures to override majority-minority districts under partisan-gerrymandering rationales.
The empirical record post-Shelby: Within hours of the Shelby ruling, Texas, North Carolina, and other formerly-covered jurisdictions enacted voting restrictions that had been blocked under preclearance. As of 2025, formerly-covered states have enacted approximately 100+ new voting restrictions, including voter ID requirements, polling place closures, registration restrictions, and purge mechanisms.
The 15th Amendment's enforcement clause: Section 2 of the 15th Amendment explicitly empowers Congress to enforce voting rights "by appropriate legislation." The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act would update the VRA's coverage formula and restore preclearance. It has passed the House in prior Congresses but has not become law.
See: Shelby County v. Holder → | Brnovich v. DNC → | 15th Amendment →
Sources cited:BibleQuranConstitutionSupreme Court