The Supreme Court signaled strongly on Wednesday that it might strike down a section of the Voting Rights Act as the court’s conservative members cast the provision as outdated and unfair.

With a crowd of congressional Democrats and civil rights icons gathered outside, the court heard oral arguments over Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires certain states and counties to get permission from the federal government before changing their voting laws.
------
Justice Antonin Scalia argued that Congress could not be trusted to properly evaluate the current need for Section 5. He said the repeated reauthorizations of the law seemed to be an example of “perpetuation of racial entitlement.”
------
Even before Wednesday’s oral arguments, there were signs that Section 5 might be in trouble. The Supreme Court expressed “serious misgivings” about the provision in a 2009 case, saying the requirements intruded into an area that has traditionally belonged to state and local governments.
------
Some of the court’s more conservative members, including Chief Justice John Roberts, have also questioned in other contexts whether historic civil rights programs have become outdated as the legacy of slavery and segregation has faded further into history.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-r...t-act-provision

This law is stupid and outdated. The only people that don't want to show ID at the polls are the ones wanting to commit voter fraud.
Nothing else makes any sense.

This is it in a nutshell.

Zitat

---

Justice Antonin Scalia argued that Congress could not be trusted to properly evaluate the current need for Section 5. He said the repeated reauthorizations of the law seemed to be an example of “perpetuation of racial entitlement.”

---

Quote: Cedric wrote in post #3

---

The Supreme Court signaled strongly they would strike down Obamacare, too.

---