Filling the Gap: State Voting Rights Acts Emerge as Federal Protections Fade

Filling the Gap: State Voting Rights Acts Emerge as Federal Protections Fade

For decades, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) stood as a cornerstone of American democracy, ensuring that all citizens, particularly those in historically marginalized communities, had equal access to the ballot box. However, in recent years, pivotal Supreme Court decisions and congressional inaction have weakened the federal framework protecting voting rights. As a result, a new movement has taken shape—states stepping in with their own voting rights legislation to preserve and expand access to democratic participation.

This shift has significant implications for how voting rights are protected in the United States. With federal protections diminished, state-level laws are becoming essential in safeguarding the right to vote. While this decentralized approach presents opportunities, it also carries risks, especially for voters in states where political will does not favor expanded access.

Erosion of Federal Protections

The dismantling of key provisions of the federal Voting Rights Act began with the 2013 Supreme Court ruling in Shelby County v. Holder. This decision invalidated the formula used to determine which jurisdictions required federal preclearance before changing voting laws—a measure originally designed to prevent discrimination in regions with a history of voter suppression.

In 2021, another blow came with the Supreme Court’s decision in Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee. The ruling made it more difficult to challenge voting restrictions under Section 2 of the VRA, which prohibits voting practices that discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in a language minority group.

Together, these decisions have significantly weakened the federal government’s ability to prevent or respond to voter suppression. Despite repeated attempts, Congress has failed to restore the VRA through legislation such as the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, which has stalled due to partisan gridlock.

A Patchwork of Protections

In response to the vacuum left by the fading federal protections, some states have taken it upon themselves to introduce their own State Voting Rights Acts (SVRAs). These laws are designed to preserve and even expand upon the original principles of the VRA, ensuring robust protections against discriminatory practices in voting.

California was the first to enact such a law with the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) in 2002. The CVRA makes it easier for minority groups to challenge at-large election systems that dilute their voting power. Since then, other states have followed suit, including Washington (2018), Oregon (2019), New York (2022), and Connecticut (2023).

Each SVRA varies in scope and enforcement mechanisms, but they generally share key goals:

• Preventing voter discrimination

• Enhancing language access

• Increasing transparency around election changes

• Establishing remedies for violations

The New York John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act

One of the most comprehensive state-level voting rights laws to date is the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York, signed into law in June 2022. This legislation seeks to replicate and enhance provisions of the federal VRA by:

• Requiring jurisdictions with a history of discrimination to obtain preclearance from the state Attorney General before making changes to voting practices

• Expanding language assistance for voters with limited English proficiency

• Creating a state-level database of demographic and election data to monitor discrimination

• Providing a clear process for voters to challenge discriminatory practices in court

New York’s law is a model for how states can take the lead in protecting voting rights, particularly in the absence of federal oversight.

Challenges and Limitations

While state-level initiatives represent a promising development, they are not without challenges. First, only a handful of states have passed these laws, leaving millions of voters in other states without similar protections. This has created a patchwork system, where the right to vote is more secure in some states than others.

Additionally, SVRAs rely heavily on state political climates. In states with legislatures hostile to expanded voting access, the likelihood of passing robust protections is slim. In some cases, state governments have moved in the opposite direction—enacting laws that restrict voting access under the guise of “election integrity.”

Legal challenges also present a hurdle. Opponents of SVRAs argue they impose undue burdens on local governments or infringe upon election administration authority. As state laws proliferate, courts will likely play a key role in interpreting their limits and impact.

The Role of Advocacy and Grassroots Movements

Much of the momentum behind SVRAs has been driven by civil rights organizations, local activists, and grassroots campaigns. These groups have pushed for legislation, raised public awareness, and helped craft policy solutions tailored to specific state needs.

For example, organizations like Demos, the Brennan Center for Justice, and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund have provided legal expertise, research, and advocacy strategies to support state-level action. Local coalitions have mobilized voters and built pressure on legislators to act in favor of voting rights.

Their efforts underscore a crucial point: democracy thrives when communities are engaged, and state voting rights laws are one tool to support that engagement.

Looking Ahead

The emergence of State Voting Rights Acts reflects both the vulnerability and resilience of American democracy. While the rollback of federal protections represents a serious setback, the proactive stance of several states shows that progress is still possible.

To ensure voting rights are universally protected, a dual approach is necessary:

1. Continued advocacy for federal voting rights legislation, such as restoring key provisions of the VRA

2. Expansion of state-level protections, especially in regions where voters remain vulnerable to suppression

Ultimately, voting should be a right enjoyed equally by all citizens, not a privilege contingent on geography. As federal protections fade, the importance of state action has never been more evident. The future of democracy may very well depend on it.