The Impact of Strong Voting Laws on Democracy

By Kavya Tulsiani 

Since the abolition of slavery, the southern U.S. states have enacted Jim Crow laws to discriminate against people of color. These included strict voting laws designed to silence people of color, especially black people. After the passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965, these tactics became illegal, yet conservative politicians still found other ways to get around them. Until the 2013 Supreme Court case, Shelby County v. Holder, overturned the Voting Rights Act of 1965, people of color were given the right to vote without restrictions. After Shelby, southern states and many other Republican states enacted strict voting laws to deter people of color from voting, which continues today. The historical impact of discrimination on who gets to vote raises an important question: should there be national voting standards? 

National voting standards would significantly help end discrimination by preventing states from discriminating against voters to gain power. Jim Crow laws prevented people of color from voting despite the passage of the 15th Amendment to the US Constitution, which states that any US citizen’s right to vote “shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” Although strict voting laws were unconstitutional, politicians used methods such as impassable literacy tests, gerrymandering, and high poll taxes to segregate the ballot. 

The turning point for voting laws was Bloody Sunday. What started off as a peaceful march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in March of 1965, became extremely violent after the police arrived and attacked the protestors. This set off a national effort to ensure that people of color could vote without discrimination. President Lyndon B. Johnson passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965, forcing states to get clearance from the federal government before they could change their laws.

In 2008, when Barack Obama, America’s first black president, was elected, Republicans saw it as their chance to overturn the act, claiming that a black president was proof that preclearance was no longer. The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg saw overturning the Voting Rights Act as damaging, comparing ending “preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes” to “throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet,” and she was right. 

Getting rid of the Voting Rights Act was the step that southern and Republican states needed to reenact strict voting laws that silenced the voices of millions of people across the country. The Los Angeles Times reported that the act ensured that people of color would have political power by addressing “not only restrictions on an individual's right to vote but on official action -- such as redistricting maps -- that give minority groups ‘less opportunity than other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice,’”. 

Conservative states consistently argue that strong voting laws are needed to prevent voting fraud; however, research shows there is very little voting fraud nationally: around 2,000 cases in the 2016 presidential election and around 1,500 in 2020 (All In: The Fight for Democracy). Neither of these amounts would have had any impact on the elections. 

Both these elections occurred after the ruling of Shelby, proving the strict voting laws that many US states have created have no impact on the election; instead, voter fraud has been used as an excuse by the Republican Party to continue the use and creation of Jim Crow laws, which include many old tactics, including gerrymandering, alongside new laws, such as strict voter ID laws and poll purges.

In the case of voter IDs, millions of Americans lack sufficient forms of identification, and they lack the means to achieve it. States have turned down many forms of photo IDs, including student IDs, which disproportionately impacts the younger eligible voters. Research conducted by the Pew Research Center shows that those under the age of 50 tend to vote Democratic while those over 50 tend to vote Republican, providing a reason for the strict laws the latter party endorses. 

Moreover, minorities are also disadvantaged, as they are far more likely to not own sufficient forms of identification than the average white citizen; people of color are also more likely to vote for Democrats. The strict voting laws only discriminate against specific demographics to ensure a specific political party will win the elections. In a ranking of voting laws across the states by The New York Times, Illinois’ looser voting laws make it the 9th easiest state to vote in, and the Democratic Party tends to control it. Meanwhile, Texas is one of the hardest states to vote in. Its harsh laws cause Republicans to consistently win the state elections. Both parties want political power, but they have different actions. While the Democratic Party works to give everyone the right to vote, the Republican Party disproportionately removes it from many demographics. 

The actions taken by different states show that they need guidelines to run their elections. The civil rights of US citizens, especially people of color, should not be compromised for a party to gain power. The federal government is the only power that can ensure these rights every US citizen deserves, and it needs to set national standards to protect the right to vote.

Works Cited 

Corasaniti, Nick, and Allison McCann. "The 'Cost' of Voting in America: A Look at Where It's Easiest and Hardest." New York Times, 21 Sept. 2022, 

www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/09/20/us/politics/cost-of-voting.html. Accessed 17 July 2024. 

Fredrickson, Caroline, and Ilan Wurman, editors. "Shelby County v. Holder (2013)." National Constitution Center, 2013, 

constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/supreme-court-case-library/shelby-county-v-holder . Accessed 17 July 2024. 

Garbus, Liz, and Lisa Cortés, directors. All In: The Fight for Democracy. Screenplay by Jack Youngelson, produced by Stacey Abrams, Story Syndicate, 2020. 

Hartig, Hannah, et al. "Republican Gains in 2022 Midterms Driven Mostly by Turnout Advantage." Pew Research Center, 12 July 2023, 

www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/07/12/demographic-profiles-of-republican-and-demo cratic-voters/#Age-composition-of-2022-voters. Accessed 17 July 2024. 

Los Angeles Times. "Editorial: Another court decision weakens the Voting Rights Act. Will the Supreme Court right this wrong?" Los Angeles Times, 30 Nov. 2023, 

www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-11-30/editorial-the-voting-rights-act-supreme-cour t. Accessed 17 July 2024. 

United States Government. "15th Amendment." National Constitution Center, 3 Feb. 1870, constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/amendments/amendment-xv. Accessed 17 July 2024.