Politics

Supreme Court’s Shelby Ruling Makes Selma a ‘Footnote’

Published

11 years ago

March 3, 2015

Alabama State Rep. Merika Coleman-Evans (D) and Jesse Jackson talk about voting rights at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. (Freddie Allen/NNPA)

By Freddie Allen
NNPA Senior Washington Correspondent

WASHINGTON (NNPA) – As Washington lawmakers, local officials and activists prepare to march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge to observe the 50^th anniversary of “Bloody Sunday” in Selma, Ala., some civil rights leaders want them to remember that voting rights are still under attack.

Jesse L. Jackson, Sr., the president and founder of the Rainbow PUSH Coalition, recently convened a meeting of voting rights advocates and community stakeholders in Washington, D.C. to review the past, present and future of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA).

When the United States Supreme Court invalidated the coverage formula (Section 4) of the law in Shelby County v. Holder in July 2013, the court’s ruling effectively neutered Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. States and jurisdictions with histories of voter discrimination would no longer be forced to pre-clear changes in their voting laws with the Department of Justice or in federal court in Washington, D.C.

In the aftermath of the ruling, Texas and North Carolina passed a series of restrictive voting laws that experts said will make it harder for poor people and Blacks to vote.

“My biggest fear with the movie ‘Selma’ and the excitement around the celebrations this year is that we will go to Selma and think Shelby is the footnote,” said Jackson. “Shelby is the deal, Selma is the footnote.”

In his typical fashion, Jackson said that events of Selma 50 year ago is in the rear view mirror and Shelby is in front of us and it’s getting bigger everyday.

Barbara Arnwine, the president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a nonpartisan group focused on ending racial discrimination, said that in the wake of the Shelby County decision, it’s much harder to monitor what happens at the local level and that’s really where voting rights advocates miss Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

Arnwine expressed concerns that not enough is known about what local officials are doing to protect the right to vote in cities and municipalities that are holding elections for critically important county commission seats, city councils and school boards.

“So much is happening at the local level. Everyone monitors what happens at the state level, but what we don’t know with clarity is what is happening at the local level,” said Arnwine. “The beauty of [Section 5] was that it stopped discrimination before it happened, because it required covered jurisdictions to report any changes, and we were able to track those changes.”

Lawyers and voting rights advocates have turned to Section 2 of the voting law to defend voters, which is more costly and time consuming than bringing claims under Section 5.

Aggrieved parties not only have to wait until after the voting law takes effect before filing a lawsuit, they also have to prove that law is discriminatory, a high bar for voting rights lawyers and almost impossible for citizens to reach on their own.

According to research conducted by the Lawyers’ Committee, 72 percent of all successful discrimination claims under Section 2 were in jurisdictions formerly covered by Section 5. Two-thirds of those claims were in jurisdictions in only four states: Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas.

Months before the Shelby County decision, Tanya Clay House, the public policy director for the Lawyers’ Committee, said that voting rights advocates planned for the possibility that the Supreme Court led by Chief Justice John Roberts would strike down the landmark law.

“We have to let go of what we had in Section 5, because we’re not going to get that back,” said Clay House. “It’s unfortunate, but that is the reality we’re faced with right now.”

Clay House said that the Voting Rights Amendment Act (VRAA), a bipartisan bill introduced by Reps. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) and John Conyers (D-Mich.), isn’t perfect, but it’s better than what citizens have now.

The proposed bill includes a new requirement that all states would have to give notice to any voting rights changes and a “rolling trigger” for Department of Justice oversight for states with five voting rights violations, and political subdivisions with three violations in 15 years.

The Sensenbrenner-Convers bill, which never made it out of the Judiciary Committee during the last legislative session, also would allow federal observers in states outside of formerly covered jurisdictions.

But the proposal also includes a special exception for the controversial photo identification requirements some states have adopted. Further, it includes a carve out for the controversial photo identification requirements some states have adopted.

“We recognize that it’s a compromise bill that does strengthen our position and moves us from having nothing. We have no coverage compared to what we had under Section 5,” said Clay House.

She said that the Lawyers’ Committee will also join other groups to work on issues outside of the proposed bill, including long lines during elections, that have some have dubbed “the time tax” and challenges of early voting.

The most underutilized power that people of color have in this country that we have is economic boycotts, said Arnwine.

“For a nation that hates to talk about race, for a nation consumed by active racial denial, it has been fascinating to watch our nation be rocked by young people protesting the death of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice and so many others, it has been fascinating to see this movement take to the streets,” said Arnwine. “Our challenge is to take that same level of energy to the streets on voting rights.”

The the Voting Rights Amendment Act has received less bipartisan support in the current Congress and Republicans in the United States House of Representatives have adopted the opinion that the Voting Rights Act worked so well that protections under Section 5 were no longer needed.

Jackson said that he didn’t want politicians marching in Selma who should be marching in Shelby County, because that’s’ what they stand for.

“If you’re for Shelby, say you’re for Shelby,” said Jackson. “My fear is that those who are hyped up coming from Congress want their ‘I went to Selma’ [photo-op], who are against what we stand for. There should be some line of demarcation established in that situation.”

Alabama State Rep. Merika Coleman-Evans agreed.

“All the Repubs that will sing ‘Kumbayah’ we need to make sure that every voter in the state of Alabama is enfranchised not disenfranchised if they want to get on board with that I’m with them but I’m not for the show. I’m not for the pomp and circumstance. I’m for some real action.

“Selma is not trendy, Selma is not Hollywood, Selma is real and when everybody leaves there’s still going to be high unemployment rates in Selma along with the state of Alabama,” said Coleman-Evans, who was also an Alabama state surrogate for President Obama during his 2012 campaign. “We want people to recognize, especially the president of these United States of America, who I have supported wholeheartedly for all these years, that we need help and we want to make sure others don’t co-op an event that has been done the same way for the past 40 years.”

###

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Blacks Still Underrepresented at All Levels of Politics

Don't Miss

GOP Leaders are Struggling to Show They Really are in Charge

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

Supreme Court Voting Rights Ruling Reverberates From the South to California

The Supreme Court’s recent ruling weakening the Voting Rights Act is reshaping political battles, particularly in the South. While California’s protections may offer a buffer, the decision raises national concerns about Black political representation and redistricting.

Published

1 day ago

May 15, 2026

Oakland Post

Researchers pointed out that the number amounts to 1 in every 50 adults, with 3 out of 4 disenfranchised living in their communities, having completed their sentences or remaining supervised while on probation or parole. (Photo: iStockphoto)

iStock.

By Brandon Patterson

A recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling weakening a key section of the federal Voting Rights Act is already reshaping political battles in parts of the South while raising broader questions about the future of Black political representation nationwide.

In Louisiana v. Callais, the Court’s conservative majority limited the use of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the provision historically used to challenge electoral maps that dilute minority voting strength. Writing in dissent, Justice Elena Kagan warned that the ruling marked the “now-complete demolition of the Voting Rights Act.”

The immediate effects of the ruling are expected to be felt most sharply in Southern states, where litigation over majority-Black districts has shaped congressional maps for decades. Republican-led states including Louisiana, Alabama, and Texas have already moved to defend or revisit maps following the decision, according to reporting by Reuters and Politico.

California’s political landscape is different. The state uses an independent citizen’s commission to draw district lines and also has its own California Voting Rights Act, which in some cases provides broader protections than federal law. Because of those safeguards, the Supreme Court’s decision is not expected to immediately alter Black political representation in California.

Still, legal scholars and voting rights advocates say the ruling could shape future national debates over how race is considered in redistricting and voting rights enforcement.

“It changes the legal atmosphere around voting rights nationally,” UCLA law professor Rick Hasen told Axios. “Even states with stronger protections are paying attention to where the Court is headed.”

The decision also arrives amid renewed political fights over redistricting. In California, voters approved Proposition 50 in November 2025, a measure backed by Gov. Gavin Newsom that expanded the state’s ability to redraw congressional maps in response to mid-decade redistricting efforts in other states.

Supporters argued the measure was necessary to counter increasingly aggressive Republican-led redistricting nationally, while critics warned it could weaken California’s independent redistricting tradition.

For Black Californians, the ruling lands at a time when political representation remains significant even as demographic shifts have changed historically Black neighborhoods in cities like Oakland, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee criticized the Court’s decision in comments to The Oaklandside, calling the Voting Rights Act one of the nation’s foundational civil rights protections.

“This decision weakens one of the most important civil rights tools our communities have had,” Lee said. “We know voting rights were never given freely. People fought and died for them.”

Rep. Lateefah Simon warned against complacency.

“This is part of a larger effort to erase the gains of the civil rights movement,” Simon told Oaklandside. “Black political power matters, and representation matters.”

The Voting Rights Act, passed in 1965 during the height of the Civil Rights Movement, helped expand Black political representation nationwide, including in California, where coalition politics among Black, Latino and Asian American voters helped elect candidates of color at the local, state and federal levels.

For many observers, the latest ruling serves less as an immediate threat to California districts and more as a reminder that voting rights protections long viewed as settled remain politically and legally contested.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Amsterdam News

School District Extends Supt. Dr. Denise Saddler’s Contract for a Second Year

The Oakland Board of Education has extended Superintendent Denise Saddler’s contract through June 2027, promoting her from interim to permanent superintendent with a salary of $367,765.45 per year.

Published

1 day ago

May 15, 2026

Oakland Post

Supt. Dr. Denise Saddler. File photo.

By Post Staff

The Oakland Board of Education voted this week to extend Superintendent Denise Saddler’s contract for another year, from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2027.

Under the new agreement, Saddler’s job title will become “superintendent”; she will no longer be called “interim.”

Along with the new title, she will receive full superintendent benefits and salary at $367,765.45 per year, according to the employment agreement.

The vote to approve the new contract passed 5-2 at Wednesday night’s board meeting.

Saddler’s original interim contract was for one year. The school board was planning to select a permanent superintendent by the fall but earlier this year decided to delay the search.

The new contract reflects the Board of Education’s “determination that continuity in executive leadership is in the best interests of the district as Oakland Unified continues implementation of its fiscal stabilization strategies, academic priorities, labor relations initiatives, and operational improvements,” the employment agreement reads.

In November, the board approved a $150,000 contract with a consulting firm to carry out that search, but Board President Jennifer Brouhard told KQED last month that the process never got off the ground.

“No work was done, no money has been paid for the work (to) the search firm for the superintendent search,” Brouhard said. “Hopefully, we’ll be resuming that in the early part of the fall.”

Dr. Saddler was born and raised in Oakland, attended local schools, and has dedicated more than 45 years of her career to serving Oakland students and families.

She began her career in 1979 as a teacher of students with disabilities. Over the years, she has served as a teacher, principal, district leader, and teachers’ union president.

While working in OUSD, she has served as principal at Chabot Elementary, area auperintendent, and executive leader for Community Engagement and Educational Transitions. She has also supported schools as a principal coach and substitute principal and taught at UC Berkeley’s Graduate School of Education.

Dr. Saddler holds a Doctorate in Educational Leadership from Mills College and master’s degrees in special education and in Staff Development and Administration.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Mayor Barbara Lee Joins National Public Safety Leaders to Advance Proven Violence Reduction Strategies

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee attends a two-day meeting with other mayors and public safety leaders to discuss violence reduction strategies; Oakland has seen a 39% drop in homicides.

Published

1 day ago

May 15, 2026

Oakland Post

Oakland was one of four cities participating in a public safety convening. Courtesy image.

By Post Staff

Mayor Barbara Lee this week joined Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott, Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker and public safety leaders from Oakland for a two-day meeting focused on advancing cutting-edge public safety strategies, including focused deterrence and violence reduction.

The meeting brought together civic and public safety leaders from Oakland and Indianapolis to locations in Baltimore and Philadelphia to share lessons learned and identify innovative approaches to crime prevention, intervention, and enforcement.

The participating cities are widely recognized for pioneering community-centered public safety models that prioritize prevention, accountability, and sustained investment in neighborhood-based solutions

Oakland’s delegation included Department of Violence Prevention (DVP) Chief Holly Joshi, Oakland Police Department Assistant Chief Casey Johnson, and Ceasefire Director Annette Jointer.

Oakland’s participation underscores its continued leadership in advancing evidence-based violence reduction strategies and building a public safety system that integrates law enforcement with community intervention and prevention programs.

Oakland continues to see historic reductions in violence, reflecting coordinated efforts across the Department of Violence Prevention, Oakland Police Department, Ceasefire, and community-based partners, including:

Violent crime down 22%
Homicides down 39%
Lowest homicide total in nearly 60 years

These gains reflect sustained investment in focused deterrence strategies, real-time intervention, and expanded community violence interruption programs.

“Public safety is not achieved by any one agency alone—it requires coordination, trust, and a shared commitment to prevention and accountability,” said Lee. “We are proud to stand alongside cities like Baltimore, Philadelphia, and Indianapolis that are proving what works. We are seeing real progress in reducing violence in our communities, and we remain committed to building on that momentum through strategies that center prevention, intervention, and strong partnerships with residents.”

“Oakland’s progress shows what is possible when cities invest in focused deterrence and wraparound supports that reach people most at risk,” said Joshi. “Our work is grounded in building trust, responding quickly to emerging conflicts, and connecting individuals to services that interrupt cycles of violence. This convening was an opportunity to strengthen that work through shared learning with peers who are advancing similar strategies nationwide.”

Said Johnson, “Effective public safety requires a balanced approach that combines accountability with deep collaboration across agencies and communities.”

“We are seeing meaningful reductions in violent crime because of strong partnerships between law enforcement, DVP, Ceasefire, and community organizations,” said Johnson. “Engaging with peer cities allows us to refine and improve the strategies that are making Oakland safer.”