12-96 Brief for the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights and the Leadership Conference Education Fund Et Al. in Suppo
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
No. 12-96 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States SHELBY COUNTY, ALABAMA, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL., Respondents. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit BRIEF OF THE LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE EDUCATION FUND ET AL. AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS LISA M. BORNSTEIN MATTHEW M. HOFFMAN THE LEADERSHIP CONFER- (Counsel of record) ENCE ON CIVIL AND HU- STEPHEN J. POLLAK MAN RIGHTS JOHN TOWNSEND RICH 1629 K St. N.W. SIRISHA V. KALICHETI Washington, DC 20006 ELLA A. CAPONE (202) 466-3311 GOODWIN PROCTER LLP 901 New York Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20001 (202) 346-4000 Counsel for Amici Curiae February 1, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .................................... iii INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ............................. 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT .................................. 2 ARGUMENT ............................................................ 6 I. There Is Real and Substantial Risk That the Progress Made in Combatting Voting Discrimination Since 1965 Will Be Eroded If § 5 Is Invalidated. ........................................... 6 A. History Shows That Gains In Minority Political Participation Can Be Reversed When Remedial Laws Are Invalidated. ...... 7 B. Recent Court Decisions Show That Without the Protection of § 5 Many Covered Jurisdictions Would Adopt Practices That Abridge Minority Voting Rights. ........................................................ 14 II. Congress’s Decision To Reauthorize § 5 and To Retain the Existing Coverage Formula Are Amply Supported by the Legislative Record and Are Entitled to Deference. ........... 20 A. Congress Reasonably Concluded on an Extensive Record That Discriminatory Voting Practices Still Continue in the Covered Jurisdictions. ............................... 24 ii B. Congress’s Decision To Retain the Existing Coverage Formula Was Reasonable. ................................................ 28 III. The Coverage of § 5 Will Likely Be Reduced Over Time Through the Application of the Bailout Mechanism. ......................................... 33 CONCLUSION ....................................................... 35 APPENDIX A: The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights Participating Member Organizations APPENDIX B: Additional Amici Curiae iii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases: Page City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997) ........... 22 Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008) .......................................... 14, 15 Florida v. United States, No. 11-1428, 2012 U.S. Dist LEXIS 115647 (D.D.C. Aug. 16, 2012) ................................................................. 16, 17 Jeffers v. Clinton, 740 F. Supp. 585, 626-27 (E.D. Ark, 1990) ..................................................... 32 New York Trust Co. v. Eisner, 256 U.S. 345 (1921) ........................................................................ 6 Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Holder, 577 U.S. 193 (2009) ........................................................... 7, 28, 34 South Carolina v. United States, No. 12-203, 2012 U.S. Dist LEXIS 146187 (D.D.C. Oct. 10, 2012) .................................................... 17, 18 Texas v. Holder, No. 12-cv-128, 2012 U.S. Dist LEXIS 127119 (D.D.C. Aug. 30, 2012) ............ 15, 16 Texas v. United States, No. 11-1303, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121685 (D.D.C. 2012) .................. 19, 20 Turner Broad. Sys., Inc. v. FCC, 520 U.S. 180 (1997) ...................................................... 5, 21, 22, 23 United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876) .......................................................... 10, 11, 12 United States v. Reese, 92 U.S. 214 (1876) ... 10, 11, 12 iv Constitutional Provisions U.S. CONST. amend. XIV ....................................... 2, 31 U.S. CONST. amend. XV ................................. 2, 3, 7, 31 Statutes: Act of Feb. 28, 1871, ch. 99, 16 Stat. 433 ................... 7 Enforcement Act of 1870, 16 Stat. 140 ....................... 7 Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006, Pub L. No. 109-246, 120 Stat. 577 (2006): § 2(b)(3) ................................................................ 24 § 2(b)(4)(A) ..................................................... 25, 27 § 2(b)(4)(B) ........................................................... 27 § 2(b)(7) ........................................................... 20-21 § 2(b)(9) ................................................................ 21 § 3(c) .................................................................... 30 Voting Rights Act of 1965, Pub L. No. 89-110, 79 Stat. 437, as amended: § 2, 42 U.S.C. § 1973 ........................................... 29 § 3(c), 42 U.S.C. § 1973a(c) ................................. 32 § 4(a), 42 U.S.C. § 1973b(a) ................................ 32 § 5, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c ................................. passim Legislative History: 152 CONG. REC. 14,303 (2006) ................................... 24 152 CONG. REC. 14,273-74 (2006).............................. 30 152 CONG. REC. 14,275 (2006) ................................... 31 152 CONG. REC. 14,301 (2006) ................................... 31 152 CONG. REC. 15,325 (2006) ................................... 24 v Extension of the Voting Rights Act: Hearings Before the Subcomm. on Civil and Constitu- tional Rights of the H. Comm. on the Judici- ary, 97th Cong. (1981) ............................................ 13 H.R. REP. NO. 109-478 ....................................... passim S. REP. NO. 109-295 (2006) ........................................ 23 To Examine the Impact and Effectiveness of the Voting Rights Act: Hearing Before the Sub- comm. on the Constitution of the House Comm, on the Judiciary, 109th Cong. (2006) ....... 29 Voting Rights Act: An Examination of the Scope and Criteria for Coverage Under the Special Provisions of the Act: Hearing Before the Sub- comm. on the Constitution of the H. Comm. On the Judiciary, 109th Cong. (2005) .............. 34-35 Other Authorities: Travis Crum, Note, The Voting Rights Act’s Se- cret Weapon: Pocket Trigger Litigation and Dynamic Preclearance, 119 YALE L.J. 1992 (2010) ...................................................................... 32 ERIC FONER, RECONSTRUCTION: AMERICA’S UN- FINISHED REVOLUTION (1988) ................... 8, 9, 11, 12 WILLIAM GILLETTE, RETREAT FROM RECON- STRUCTION 1869–1879 (1979) ................................. 12 BERNARD GROFMAN ET AL., MINORITY REPRE- SENTATION AND THE QUEST FOR VOTING EQUALITY (1992) ................................................. 7, 10 vi J. Gerald Hebert, An Assessment of the Bailout Provisions of The Voting Rights Act, in VOT- ING RIGHTS ACT REAUTHORIZATION OF 2006: PERSPECTIVES ON DEMOCRACY, PARTICIPA- TION, AND POWER 257 (Ana Henderson ed., 2007) ....................................................................... 35 LEEANNA KEITH, THE COLFAX MASSACRE (2008) ................................................................ 11, 12 MICHAEL J. KLARMAN, FROM JIM CROW TO CIVIL RIGHTS: THE SUPREME COURT AND THE STRUGGLE FOR RACIAL EQUALITY (2004) ............ 8, 10 CHARLES LANE, THE DAY FREEDOM DIED: THE COLFAX MASSACRE, THE SUPREME COURT, AND THE BETRAYAL OF RECONSTRUCTION (2008) ........... 11 1 GEORGE SANTAYANA, THE LIFE OF REASON; OR, THE PHASES OF HUMAN PROGRESS (1905) ................ 6 RICHARD M. VALELLY, THE TWO RECONSTRUC- TIONS: THE STRUGGLE FOR BLACK ENFRAN- CHISEMENT (2004) ............................................... 7, 10 2 CHARLES WARREN, THE SUPREME COURT IN UNITED STATES HISTORY (1922) ............................. 12 INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights (“The Leadership Conference”) is a coalition of over 200 organizations committed to the protection of civil and human rights in the United States.1 It is the nation’s oldest, largest, and most diverse civil and human rights coalition. The Leadership Confer- ence was founded in 1950 by three legendary leaders of the civil rights movement—A. Philip Randolph, of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters; Roy Wil- kins, of the NAACP; and Arnold Aronson, of the Na- tional Jewish Community Relations Advisory Coun- cil. Its member organizations represent people of all races and ethnicities.2 One of the missions of The Leadership Conference is to promote effective civil rights legislation and policy. The Leadership Confer- ence was in the vanguard of the movement to secure passage of the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960 and 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Fair Housing Act of 1968. It also played a leading role in gathering evidence to submit to Congress and coor- dinating the efforts of the civil rights community in connection with the 2006 amendments to the Voting Rights Act that are at issue in this case. 1 The parties have consented to the filing of this brief in letters on file with the Clerk. No counsel for a party authored this brief in whole or in part, and no such counsel or party made a mone- tary contribution intended to fund the preparation or submis- sion of this brief. No person other than amici curiae, their members, or their counsel made a monetary contribution to its preparation or submission. 2 See Appendix A for a list of The Leadership Conference’s member organizations. 2 The Leadership Conference Education Fund