In later cases, the Supreme Court is more likely to disregard one of its previous judgments that lacks a written opinion, but lower courts must respect the Supreme Court's unwritten summary affirmances as being as equally binding on them as Supreme Court judgments with written opinions. [120]:654–656, By enfranchising racial minorities, the act facilitated a political realignment of the Democratic and Republican parties. 1 v. Holder. [21]:264, On February 18 in Marion, Alabama, state troopers violently broke up a nighttime voting-rights march during which officer James Bonard Fowler shot and killed young African-American protester Jimmie Lee Jackson, who was unarmed and protecting his mother. The court will retain jurisdiction for the following 10 years and may order the jurisdiction back into coverage if the jurisdiction subsequently engages in voting discrimination. These laws were barriers at the state and local level that prevented African Americans from voting.

He concluded his speech with the words "we shall overcome", a major anthem of the Civil Rights Movement. [14]:159, On May 25, the Senate voted for cloture by a 70-30 vote, thus overcoming the threat of filibuster and limiting further debate on the bill. The hearings showed that the Justice Department's efforts to eliminate discriminatory election practices by litigation on a case-by-case basis had been unsuccessful in opening up the registration process. All rights reserved.

The court held that Section 5 constituted a valid use of Congress's power to enforce the Fifteenth Amendment, reasoning that "exceptional circumstances" of pervasive racial discrimination, combined with the inadequacy of case-by-case litigation in ending that discrimination, justified the preclearance requirement. [90]:1a-2a Although the Supreme Court held the Section 4(b) coverage formula unconstitutional in Shelby County v. Holder (2013), it did not hold Section 3(c) unconstitutional. 52 U.S.C. The bipartisan Voting Rights Advancement Act (Advancement Act) has been introduced in the both the Senate (S. 1659) and the House (H.R. [45]:476–477[103]:90, In several cases, the Supreme Court has addressed the meaning of "discriminatory effect" and "discriminatory purpose" for Section 5 purposes.

"[95], As Congress added new triggering dates to the coverage formula, new jurisdictions were brought into coverage. [17]:877, Piece of federal legislation in the United States that prohibits racial discrimination in voting, Statement by President Johnson on August 6, 1965 about the Voting Rights Act of 1965, General prohibition of discriminatory voting laws. [16]:310 However, in 1875 the Supreme Court struck down parts of the legislation as unconstitutional in United States v. Cruikshank and United States v. Those practices, many dating back to the end of the U.S. Civil War in 1865, included the imposition of literacy tests and poll taxes that often blocked Black citizens from exercising their right to vote, as guaranteed under the 15th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.