Newspaper Editorial Boards in States Covered by Section 5 of the VRA Overwhelmingly Agree that the Supreme Court Should Uphold the Law
Washington — A review of newspaper editorials in states covered in whole or part by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act found an overwhelming consensus that the Supreme Court should uphold the law as constitutional in the case Shelby County v. Holder.
The review, conducted by The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, encompassed the editorial pages of newspapers in the states and jurisdictions covered by Section 5 using data from Lexis Nexis, Google News, and individual newspaper websites.
Of 48 opinion pieces published in 2013, 36 favored Section 5 being upheld, eight opposed, and four did not favor either side.
Newspapers supporting Section 5 include the largest outlets within these jurisdictions, such as the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Anchorage Daily News, Birmingham News, The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Miss., Houston Chronicle, Dallas Morning News, Richmond Times-Dispatch, Tampa Bay Times, and the Sacramento Bee.
“This is even more evidence that Section 5 protects voting rights in the states and localities that need it most,” said Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference. “With such an overwhelming consensus of opinion in these jurisdictions, it’s clear that Section 5 is viewed as the right remedy for voting discrimination in the right places.”
A full list of opinion pieces included in the review is below.
The review includes only those newspapers that weighed in during the period surrounding oral arguments; newspapers that did not editorialize on the topic have been excluded. The Washington Post, Washington Times, The New York Times, and Wall Street Journal, which all serve national audiences as well as covered jurisdictions, were excluded from this scan.
Alabama
- Pro – Editorial: Theatre of irony, Dothan Eagle
- Pro – Op Ed: Don’t abandon key provision of Voting Rights Act, Montgomery Advertiser
- Pro – Op Ed: Why the Voting Rights Act must live on, Birmingham News
- Pro – Column: How much has Alabama changed since Rosa Parks? Maybe less than we think, Birmingham News
- Pro – Op Ed: Upholding Voting Rights Act essential, Montgomery Advertiser
- Pro- Op Ed: The threat from within — the ironic challenge to the Voting Rights Act, AL.com (collaboration between the Birmingham News, Huntsville Times, and Mobile Press-Register)
Alaska
- Pro – Op Ed: Supreme Court must defend democracy and uphold Voting Rights Act, Alaska Dispatch
- Pro – Op Ed: Voting rights law protects real voters from discrimination, Anchorage Daily News
- Pro – Op Ed: State leaders prefer cooked map to protecting Native voters, Anchorage Daily News
- Pro – Op Ed: Voting Rights Act challenged, Juneau Empire
Arizona
- Pro – Editorial: Court must defer to Congress on Voting Rights Act , Arizona Daily Star
California, Kings County
- Pro – Editorial: Protecting the right to vote is still as important as ever, Fresno Bee
California, Monterey County
- Pro –Op Ed: Other views: Voting Rights Act still needed, Monterey County Herald
California, Yuba County
- Pro – Editorial: Voting rights still need to be safeguarded, Sacramento Bee
- Pro – Op Ed: Voting rights are still vulnerable, Appeal-Democrat
Florida, Hillsborough County
- Pro – Editorial: Keep sharp watch on voting rights, Tampa Bay Times
Georgia
- Pro – Op Ed: Voting rights law protects real voters from discrimination, Macon Telegraph
- Pro – Column: Sadly, the federal Voting Rights Act still has work to do, Atlanta Journal-Constitution
- Pro – Column: Voting Rights Act still necessary, Albany Herald
- Con – Editorial: Voting Rights Act: Times have changed, Savannah Morning News
- Excluded as Equal Time Debate: Voting Rights Act debate, Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Louisiana
- Pro – Editorial: Don’t abandon key provision of Voting Rights Act, Daily World
Mississippi
- Pro – Editorial: Voting Rights Act still needed, Memphis Commercial Appeal [Serving Northern MS]
- Pro – Editorial: Preclearance actions still needed in voting process, The Clarion Ledger
- Pro – Editorial: Voting rights: We’ve come a long way, Hattiesburg American
- Con – Editorial: Congressional wording leaves Supreme Court no choice on 1965 law, Grenada Star
- Con – Editorial: Requirements should be same in all states, Natchez Democrat
- Con – Column: Court mulls Voting Rights Act, Picayune Item
North Carolina
- Pro – Op Ed: Why we still need the Voting Rights Act, News & Observer
- Pro – Op Ed: Voting Rights Act: Conservatives Trying to Have it Both Ways, News & Observer
- Neutral – Editorial: An unnecessary threat to Voting Rights Act, Charlotte Observer
New Hampshire
- Neutral—Column: A ruling on racial progress in Stewartstown and Pinkham’s Grant, New Hampshire Union Leader
- Neutral—Op Ed: Editorial: Protecting the Franchise; Expand Reach of Voting Rights Act, Valley News
- Con—Op Ed: In a rut on Voting Rights Act, New Hampshire Union Leader
South Carolina
- Con – Editorial: Unfair presumption of guilt, Post and Courier
- Con – Editorial: Equality in voting law preclearance is necessary step, Times and Democrat
South Dakota
- Pro – Op Ed: Voting Rights Act still needed in South Dakota, Rapid City Journal
Texas
- Pro – Column: Voting Rights Act as vital today as it was in 1965, Dallas Morning News
- Pro – Editorial: Supreme Court shouldn’t undo voting rights precedent, Houston Chronicle
- Pro – Editorial: Let it stand: Voting Rights Act still needed; court must turn back challenge, Longview News Journal
- Pro – Column: Scalia on Voting Rights Act: “perpetuation of racial entitlement, Fort Worth Star-Telegram
- Pro – Op Ed: Is Texas’ Asian-American political voice at risk?, Houston Chronicle
- Pro- Op Ed: Voting Rights Act appeal prods us to take up mantle of naivete, Houston Chronicle
- Pro- Column: Texas and Alabama have been up to no good, voter-wise, San Antonio Express News
- Con – Op Ed: How about equal rights and protections for all?, Fort Worth Star-Telegram
Virginia
- Pro – Column: We still need a Voting Rights Act with teeth, Richmond Times-Dispatch
- Pro – Column: Fending off discriminatory voting practices, Virginian-Pilot
- Pro – Op Ed: Turning The Clock Back On Voting Rights, The New Journal and Guide
- Neutral – Editorial: Is the Voting Rights Act an archaic statute? Hanover Herald Progress
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights is a coalition charged by its diverse membership to promote and protect the rights of all persons in the United States. The Leadership Conference works toward an America as good as its ideals. For more information on The Leadership Conference and its 200-plus member organizations, visit www.civilrights.org.