Does this hinder the Department's ability to protect minority voters before a discriminatory practice goes into effect?

Do current conditions, specifically the deluge of State laws making it more difficult to vote since the Shelby County decision, justify the need for a new coverage formula?

I agree with what Mr. Spital just testified, and I would point to the geographic coverage formula in H.R. 4, as the House passed it in 2019, as an improvement over participation rates.

I think that the approach that this Congress has been taking in the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act is an appropriate one.

Should Congress look at other indicators in addition to registration and turnout to measure the pervasiveness or persistence of race discrimination in the voting process?

section 2 litigation is a lengthy process, often taking 2--5 years to completion

The majority of the Court appears to fear that the Voting Rights Act is too, quote, 'radical,' end quote, that it will invalidate too many State voting laws.

To paraphrase Justice Kagan, never before has a statute been as extraordinary, required more sacrifice, and done more to advance our democracy than the Voting Rights Act.

Yet, the Supreme Court has treated this special statute worse than other law passed by Congress, first, by eviscerating section 4, and thus, castrating section 5.

The 15th, 19th, and 26th Amendments guarantee the right to vote, and if the right to vote is denied, those so deprived lose the ability to preserve all other constitutionally guaranteed rights and our country becomes a democracy in name only.

We either have a democracy or we don`t.