Voting Rights and Wrongs
Cato Podcast
Cato Institute
4.5 • 979 Ratings
🗓️ 23 July 2009
⏱️ 14 minutes
🧾️ Download transcript
Summary
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Transcript
Click on a timestamp to play from that location
| 0:00.0 | This is the Kato Daily Podcast for Thursday, July 23rd 2009. I'm Caleb Brown. |
| 0:09.0 | The Supreme Court has taken on voting rights more directly in recent years. |
| 0:13.3 | Abigail Thernstrom, Vice Chair of the United States Commission on Civil Rights and |
| 0:17.4 | author of the new book Voting Rights and Wrongs. |
| 0:20.3 | The elusive quest for racially fair elections spoke at the Cato Institute July 9th. |
| 0:27.0 | What jumps out at you in the Supreme Court's recent decisions on voting rights cases? |
| 0:34.0 | Well, the big decision is the most recent one involving a Northwest Austin utility |
| 0:40.0 | district and the decision, the case is normally referred to as Namudno because it's got |
| 0:48.5 | such a long name but and this is a case that involved a tiny little dinky water district basically |
| 1:00.0 | that sued the US government so it's versus Holder. |
| 1:07.4 | It started out as versus McKasey, |
| 1:09.2 | it became Holder eventually. |
| 1:11.9 | That has never discriminated against anybody. The district |
| 1:16.2 | wasn't even formed until the late 1980s. It's doesn't racially gerrymandering any districts because it doesn't have any |
| 1:28.0 | sub-districts to racially gerrymander. |
| 1:31.6 | So the big issue with respect to the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act |
| 1:36.2 | was really off the table. It's not even relevant to this district. But it basically said, but it's because it's in Texas, all of Texas is what's called covered by the Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which means that every sub-jurisdiction, every political |
| 1:56.6 | unit in the state of Texas has to submit any voting change for pre-approval by the Justice Department. |
| 2:06.0 | It, and the burden of proof is on the jurisdiction to show that it wasn't discriminatory in the voting change |
| 2:16.7 | it is proposing to make. This tiny little utility district said in effect why us I mean what justifies are having to go and beg the federal government for approval for a change we want to make and the change they |
| 2:39.6 | had submitted for preclearance was simply moving a polling place from a residence to a school. |
| 2:46.6 | So schools obviously has more accessibility than a residence does. And I mean the Justice Department didn't object. |
... |
Please login to see the full transcript.
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Cato Institute, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.
Generated transcripts are the property of Cato Institute and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.
Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.

