The Voting Rights Act of 1965
Background:
The Voting Rights Act was passed during President Johnson’s term as President in 1965, which allowed federal officers to register voters, and widened the franchisement of black Americans. It was influenced by King’s protests at Selma, during which a famous voting rights march took place. The protesters were attacked by state police, and the incident was televised, leading Johnson to take action.
The Act:
The act was passed in Congress in 1965 with an overwhelming majority. It was signed into law by President Johnson who had invited civil rights leaders to witness this action. The act aimed to increase the suffrage of black Americans, which was incredibly low in the South, through abolishing literacy tests, allowed federal officers to register voters, and authorized the Attorney General to investigate poll taxes. Though the law was passed, like many pieces of legislation, it lacked effective enforcement. Nonetheless, the act still improved voter turnout significantly, and in Mississippi there was a 53% voter increase in a matter of five years.
The act was passed in Congress in 1965 with an overwhelming majority. It was signed into law by President Johnson who had invited civil rights leaders to witness this action. The act aimed to increase the suffrage of black Americans, which was incredibly low in the South, through abolishing literacy tests, allowed federal officers to register voters, and authorized the Attorney General to investigate poll taxes. Though the law was passed, like many pieces of legislation, it lacked effective enforcement. Nonetheless, the act still improved voter turnout significantly, and in Mississippi there was a 53% voter increase in a matter of five years.
Influence:
The Voting Rights Act is a significant piece of American legislation that affirmed the rights of all Americans, no matter their race. Not only increasing African-American suffrage numbers, the act led to the Supreme Court decision to abolish poll taxes in state elections in 1966. The act has been amended to protect the rights of non-English speaking American voters as well. It is important to note that while the 15th Amendment, passed in 1870, did prevent states from denying the right to vote based on color, blacks in the South were denied this basic right of American citizenship. The Voting Rights Act is a key piece of civil rights legislation, and should be remembered as a good step in the right direction towards civil rights and changing attitudes of Americans.
Source:
http://www.history.com/topics/black-history/voting-rights-act
This is a very good post on another important moment in the civil rights movement. Although this wasn't the first law to give blacks the right to vote, it was one of the only times the government stepped in to actually enforce these laws. It is interesting that it took so much protesting from Martin Luther King and others for people to realize the injustices that were practiced during this time, but in the end it worked out.
ReplyDeleteNice post describing the impact and history of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. I did some additional research on this topic and found a great source that provides graphs of black voting trends beginning with the year 1964. In this graph, black voting turnout in the South jumped in the 1968 presidential election, indicating that the Voting Rights Act was effective in allowing blacks to vote.
ReplyDeleteSource:
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/17/upshot/black-turnout-in-1964-and-beyond.html
It's notable that Attorney General Jeff Sessions (along with some of his contemporaries) has expressed a negative opinion of the Voting Rights Act; there's a definite risk that the Act could be attacked in the recent future.
ReplyDeleteI'm also curious whether or not the Act was pushed through with the idea that it was supported by earlier laws and the amendments; was it expressed as a legally necessary step to provide rights enumerated in the 14th Amendment and that prevented discrimination? Or was it seen as legislation that made good on a desire but which had no legal support from earlier documentation?