A controversial U.S. Supreme Court decision issued earlier this year is setting the stage for a showdown between the federal government and some states about election laws, including voter identification requirements.
In the case Shelby County vs. Holder, the Supreme Court ruled that the formula used to choose jurisdictions to apply the landmark Voting Rights Act was outdated. The Voting Rights Act, which was passed in the mid-1960s, required some states and local governments -- mostly in the South -- to submit their proposed election changes to the federal government for approval before they became law. The reason for this process was to reverse years of discrimination in voting procedures.
The court's decision allowed some jurisdictions to stop submitting their election changes to the federal government for approval. And since then, several states, including Texas and North Carolina, have passed new voting legislation. These laws include scaling back early voting and imposing strict identification requirements.
Despite the court's ruling, some federal officials said they will challenge the new state laws. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has announced he will challenge new laws in North Carolina. There is already a federal case against similar election changes in Texas.
Doug Chapin, the director of the Program for Excellence in Election Administration at the University of Minnesota, said these cases are a way for the federal government to still have a say in election laws.
"These lawsuits are part of the Justice Department's effort to reassert the power of the federal government to enforce the Voting Rights Act against these states using a slightly different piece of the Voting Rights Act," he said.
Chapin said Holder argues these laws are discriminatory, using another part of the Voting Rights Act to challenge the election changes.
