Michael v. Roberts v. Jerry B. Wamser, Rita M. Krapf, Walter R. Wrenn, Jr. And David A. Robbins, Thomas A. Villa

I respectfully dissent. Today, the majority resolves the question presented — whether Roberts has standing to claim a violation of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act— through an artifice of statutory interpretation. It holds that Congress did not intend to intercede into state and local elections. I disagree. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was intended to enforce the Civil War amendments, particularly the 15th amendment, as against state election laws to the contrary. The House Report to the 1965 Act stated the following:

PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION

The bill, as amended, is designed primarily to…