SCOTUS 2013 Key Decisions

As the Supreme Court nears the end of its term, the judicial-minded have waited with baited breath for each new decision the Court hands down. Today, history was made - SCOTUS ruled the Defense of Marriage Act's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.

Around the country, proponents of civil rights broadly and same-sex marriage specifically rejoiced - the Court has finally issued a sane, progressive opinion in line with public opinion. Not to say that SCOTUS should abide by public opinion, but in this case, the writing was on the wall - blatant discrimination is not tolerated. It is a huge step forward for gay rights, and a nod to the younger generation's feelings about sexuality - that it is only the business of the people involved. 

Several Republican members of Congress responded with statements along the lines of "this belittles traditional marriage," and "I hope the states define marriage as being only between a man and a woman" - but the Court and the country have spoken out against bigotry.

Unfortunately, while this area of civil rights benefited from a huge step forward, other areas haven't been so lucky.  Yesterday, the Court overturned a key part of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 - the nine states that had been required to attain advance federal approval before making changes to their voting laws (originally intended to prevent Southern state governments from enacting laws that would make it more difficult for African Americans to register to and cast their votes) may now make changes to their voting laws immediately. 

In her dissent, Justice Ginsberg cited several instances of Voting Rights Act violations (view them in this summary) that have occurred in the past 15-20 years - from southern city councils trying to postpone elections to prevent African Americans from being elected to attempted gerrymandering to decrease the impact of the Hispanic vote.

It is interesting that the Court majority feels that the country has changed, when there are so many instances of voting violations in recent years. Chief Justice Roberts, the majority opinion author, clarified that it is the data on which current enforcement of the Voting Rights Act is based that needs to be updated, and that Congress may vote to impose new federal oversight with current data. It remains to be seen whether or not Congress will feel compelled to act on this - judging by its recent lack of productivity, though, it seems unlikely.

One can only hope that this will not have as severe ramifications of disenfranchisement as predicted.