The U.S. Department of Justice filed suit yesterday to block North Carolina’s new voter suppression law that would disenfranchise more than 300,000 voters, mostly African American, young people and seniors. In a press conference, Attorney General Eric Holder said the law passed by the Republican-dominated legislature and signed by Gov. Pat McCrory (R) in August was a deliberate attempt to exclude voters of color. 

In the latest polls for May and June, Congress’ approval rating is a mere 14%. This reflects a clear dissatisfaction with Congress not doing something meaningful to help American households. Highjacked by the Tea Party, the Republican-led House of Representatives does not want to use government to help people at a time America’s people need help digging out from policies that let Wall Street bankrupt the country.

Now Congress has been thrown the Voting Rights Act by the Supreme Court, and it struggles with fixing a broken immigration system. But, as we celebrate the federal minimum wage law turning 75 this week, we should add to the list Congress’ duty to raise the minimum wage.

This morning’s U.S. Supreme Court decision effectively striking down the heart of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by a 5-to-4 vote is shameful and a major setback to democracy.

Fifty years ago, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. led the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, and I believe as he did that the “arc of the moral universe… bends toward justice.” But today’s decision twists that bend in the wrong direction.

Angelia Wade is an associate general counsel at the AFL-CIO. She sends us this takeaway of the opening oral arguments at the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder. This is a case of extreme importance for voting rights advocates.

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of Shelby County, Alabama versus Holder. It was a spirited oral argument that drew clear and noticeable reactions from otherwise staid attorneys as we sat in the lawyers’ lounge, an area for attorneys barred before the Supreme Court but who are unable to get in the courtroom if the courtroom is at capacity, as it was yesterday. We could only hear the argument, not see the justices. The comment that received the most attention was that of Justice Antonin Scalia, who claimed the renewal of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act represented the "perpetuation of racial entitlement.” He further insinuated that no one in Congress was going to vote against the renewal of Section 5 in 2006, (Section 5 was renewed 98-0 in the Senate and 390-33 in the House) because lawmakers did not want to lose votes. He stated, "Even the name of it is wonderful, the Voting Rights Act. Who's going to vote against that?" He further claimed, “I don't think there is anything to be gained by any senator to vote against continuation of this act. And I am fairly confident it will be re-enacted in perpetuity unless—unless a court can say it does not comport with the Constitution.” But this case is not about the Court’s opinion of why senators or representatives vote the way they do, even if it is out of some kind of “political correctness” or fear.  

A new voter ID law threatened to disenfranchise tens of thousands of voters who are mostly people of color in South Carolina last year. Florida officials tried to curtail early voting that could have kept African Americans and others from the polls. Texas went for a twofer in voter suppression with a restrictive voter ID bill and a redistricting plan that put the voting rights of millions of African Americans and Latinos at risk.

Thanks to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the federal government was able to step in and preserve the people’s right to vote. But now the same forces behind the nationwide voter suppression effort are looking to the U.S. Supreme Court to repeal Section 5 and arguments begin Wednesday.

Texas AFL-CIO Communications Director Ed Sills sends us this report from his daily e-mail newsletter. Sign up for the Texas AFL-CIO E-News at labor@texasaflcio.org.   

A three-judge federal panel ruled Tuesday that Texas’ redrawing of political boundaries for Congress and the legislature discriminated against Hispanics and must be set aside under the federal Voting Rights Act.