During his Saturday show on MSNBC, Ali Velshi attacked members of the "ultra-conservative" Supreme Court for allegedly gutting voting rights and longed for the days when voting rights were respected.
Velshi kicked off his monologue by declaring: "Voting rights in America are in bad shape and Congress is at an impasse when it comes to fixing them. Once upon a time in America, however, we did have laws meant to guarantee that every American who had a right to vote was able to vote, a law that was actually quite effective at stopping state and local governments from passing laws that were meant to deny voting rights to Americans based on their race."
As part of his history lesson, Velshi referenced literacy tests but didn't care to provide a contemporary analogy, probably because he can't. After summarizing the 1965 Voting Rights Act, Velshi arrived at the 2013 case of Shelby v. Holder. "Thanks to that Supreme Court decision, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is now a ghost of its former self because, with no formula for deciding which states need to get preclearance, no state has to get preclearance," he proclaimed.
According to Velshi, this is bad news for "people who like democracy" because they'll "have to wait around and sue the state and local governments that pass discriminatory voting laws which as you might imagine is a lot less effective than we stopped discriminatory voting laws before they became the law."
After lamenting Congress hasn't passed a fix to this problem, Velshi lamented that "the Supreme Court in the meantime has been so stacked by ultra-conservative justices appointed by the twice-impeached grifter known as Donald J. Trump, that this is where we find ourselves in 2022."
Velshi then blasted the court for a procedural ruling that reversed a lower court's ruling that held Alabama's new congressional map needed a second majority-black district, declaring the map, "dilute[s] the black vote. It was a 5-4 decision to allow this racially gerrymandered map to take effect for this year's elections."
After noting Chief Justice John Roberts joined the liberals in this procedural case, Velshi warned: "I would suggest as others have before me that this is evidence that justice -- Chief Justice John Roberts has lost control of his own court and with everything from voting rights to gun control and abortion access on the line the stakes could not be higher."
Velshi then welcomed Kimberly Atkins Stohr and Mellissa Murray on for further discussion, but still never provided a real example of anyone being denied the right to vote.
This segment was sponsored by Subway.
Here is a transcript of the February 19 show:
MSNBC Velshi
2/19/2022
9:18 AM ETALI VELSHI: Voting rights in America are in bad shape and Congress is at an impasse when it comes to fixing them. Once upon a time in America, however, we did have laws meant to guarantee that every American who had a right to vote was able to vote, a law that was actually quite effective at stopping state and local governments from passing laws that were meant to deny voting rights to Americans based on their race. The landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965 made huge strides in creating fair access to the ballot at a time when voting rights were flagrantly denied through much of the American South. It banned the use of so-called literacy tests which were disproportionately forced on black voters by election officials. If they failed they didn't get to vote.
It allowed for federal oversight of the electoral process including voter registration meaning that federal officials would go register black voters if local municipalities did not comply. It called for federal election observers for certain jurisdictions where there was evidence of attempts to intimidate minority voters at the polls and crucially, this one's really important, the bottom one. Let's push into that a little bit so we can actually read it, because you need to really understand this one.
Any state or local government with a history of discrimination had to submit any new election rules or laws to the Justice Department or district court for preclearance to make sure that the changes were not designed to disenfranchise minority voters. That was an important piece of the law, and by the way, it worked for a long time. Nearly 50 years.
Then came 2013 when a case known as Shelby County v. Holder came before the Supreme Court. Shelby County, Alabama, did not like having to get permission to change its election laws so the county sued and in 2013 in a 5-to-4 decision the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act. It did so by ruling that the formula for deciding which states and localities should be required to get pre-clearance when they wanted to change voting rules was unconstitutional.
The irony is that the chief justice of the court, John Roberts, wrote the majority opinion in Shelby v. Holder essentially arguing that nearly 50 years after that legislation came into place, voter discrimination was not really a major issue anymore. He even cited an increase in black voter turnout, in his opinion. He called pre-clearance, quote, “a drastic departure from basic principles of federalism,” end quote. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg disagreed dissenting saying, quote, “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're not getting wet.” Thanks to that Supreme Court decision, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is now a ghost of its former self because with no formula for deciding which states need to get preclearance, no state has to get preclearance.
Instead, people who like democracy have to wait around and sue the state and local governments that pass discriminatory voting laws which as you might imagine is a lot less effective then we stopped discriminatory voting laws before they became the law.
The Court left it up to Congress to fix it, to come up with a new formula for preclearance. Spoiler alert: Congress didn't do that and the Supreme Court in the meantime has been so stacked by ultra-conservative justices appointed by the twice-impeached grifter known as Donald J. Trump, that this is where we find ourselves in 2022. The Supreme Court, this month, reinstated a newly drawn congressional map in Alabama that a lower court ruled would dilute the black vote. It was a 5-4 decision to allow this racially gerrymandered map to take effect for this year's elections and the very person who wrote the 2013 decision that gutted the Voting Rights Act, this man, the chief justice, John Roberts sided with the liberals on the Court in dissenting.
I would suggest as others have before me that this is evidence that justice -- Chief Justice John Roberts has lost control of his own court and with everything from voting rights to gun control and abortion access on the line the stakes could not be higher.
