Law and justice are two very different things that share a close relationship with each other. Law exists in a two-dimensional spectrum, whereas justice, a socially constructed view, can never be so simply described. In modern society, there are social institutions in place to enforce laws loosely guided by ethics and justice. Occasionally, laws may contradict each other, so as a society we have created a hierarchy of laws: constitutional amendments, federal laws, states laws, etc. When overlapping and contradicting laws simultaneously exist, it becomes the duty of the courts to decide, which law society is governed under. Here in lies the problem with our modern system of justice; it focuses on defending the hierarchy of law rather than
…show more content…
Problems that “entrenched racial discrimination in voting (Roberts 57)” do not exist in our nation today and that “history did not end in 1965” (Roberts 58). He argued that using a decades-old system to determine racial discrimination in voting is unfair to states because the system had lost its efficacy. Chief Justice Roberts’s views were a contradiction to the events that would transpire. Immediately following the Shelby v. Holder decision, multiple states in the South enacted voter identification requirements for voting, claiming that enforcing voter identification laws would decrease the number of fraudulent votes. The true intent of the restriction is to prevent African Americans from voting because they tend to vote Democratic. The Voting Rights Act prevented states that had a history of discrimination from changing their voting procedures or laws without the approval of the federal government. Many individuals could not afford the time away from work to get an identification card or could afford to pay the fee for the card, which was in effect a poll tax. Furthermore, many states shortened their early voter registration period. This takes away flexibility from people that may not be able to take the time when the shorter registration period is open to register. Some states also practiced gerrymandering to manipulate the geography of districts to …show more content…
Shelby v. Holder is one example where instead of the interpretation of the Voting Rights Act as one that is critical to the American voting process, it was interpreted as overbearing and unfair to affected states. The definition of justice has changed from the 1960s to today, but the courts have misinterpreted that definition. Justice still encompasses the fundamental liberty of an America citizen that is the right to vote. The Voting Rights Act was an essential part of protecting that right for many minorities in the past and today. The consequences of this decision are already present with the passage of many new discriminatory laws in some states and will only continue to
Problems that “entrenched racial discrimination in voting (Roberts 57)” do not exist in our nation today and that “history did not end in 1965” (Roberts 58). He argued that using a decades-old system to determine racial discrimination in voting is unfair to states because the system had lost its efficacy. Chief Justice Roberts’s views were a contradiction to the events that would transpire. Immediately following the Shelby v. Holder decision, multiple states in the South enacted voter identification requirements for voting, claiming that enforcing voter identification laws would decrease the number of fraudulent votes. The true intent of the restriction is to prevent African Americans from voting because they tend to vote Democratic. The Voting Rights Act prevented states that had a history of discrimination from changing their voting procedures or laws without the approval of the federal government. Many individuals could not afford the time away from work to get an identification card or could afford to pay the fee for the card, which was in effect a poll tax. Furthermore, many states shortened their early voter registration period. This takes away flexibility from people that may not be able to take the time when the shorter registration period is open to register. Some states also practiced gerrymandering to manipulate the geography of districts to …show more content…
Shelby v. Holder is one example where instead of the interpretation of the Voting Rights Act as one that is critical to the American voting process, it was interpreted as overbearing and unfair to affected states. The definition of justice has changed from the 1960s to today, but the courts have misinterpreted that definition. Justice still encompasses the fundamental liberty of an America citizen that is the right to vote. The Voting Rights Act was an essential part of protecting that right for many minorities in the past and today. The consequences of this decision are already present with the passage of many new discriminatory laws in some states and will only continue to