to allow, but that now can be forced through because the voting rights act is dead? dead unless republicans in congress agree that it should be saved. which republican party are you? in a blistering, long, incredulous descent from the court s ruling today, ruth bader ginsburg said the court dramatically overreached. he said, hubris is a fit word for today s demolition of the voting rights act. john lewis put it in terms just as stark. he said the supreme court put a dagger in the heart of the voting rights act. the thing about this dagger in the heart, though, is that the patient with the dagger in the heart is still alive. and the doctor standing over the body thinking about what to do next turns out is a republican. the voting rights act did not have section 5 struck down. preclearance still exists theoretically. the voting rights act can be
the question is not whether we need to act. the overwhelming judgment of science, of chemistry and physics and millions of measurements has put all that to rest. i don t have much patience for anyone who denies that this challenge is real. we don t have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. the question now is whether we will have the courage to act before it s too late. and how we answer will have a profound impact on the world that we leave behind not just to you, but to your children and to your grandchildren. as a president, as a father, and as an american, i m here to say we need to act. when he says there, over the
saved. which republican party are you? in a blistering, long, incredulous descent from the court s ruling today, ruth bader ginsburg said the court dramatically overreached. she said, hubris is a fit word for today s demolition of the voting rights act. john lewis put it in terms just as stark. he said the supreme court put a dagger in the heart of the voting rights act. the thing about this dagger in the heart, though, is that the patient with the dagger in the heart is still alive. and the doctor standing over the body thinking about what to do next turns out is a republican. the voting rights act did not have section 5 struck down. preclearance still exists theoretically. the voting rights act can be saved right away if congress decides to save it. the democrats want to save it. unanimously.
first heard about it today. since then, have you heard anything from your colleagues in washington that gives you any more hope about saving this law? several of my colleagues on the democratic side have said that we must go back and reauthorize the act the same way that we did in 2006. and i did read a statement that the majority leader, eric cantor, made that because of his trip to selma last march, that was moving to him, it had a profound impact on him, that he would take a serious look at the decision and whether we should reauthorize that section of the voting rights act of 1965. do you agree if congress was able to act, maybe that showing of support from congressman cantor means that republicans might be willing to do it. if congress could act post-haste, could that limit the amount of damage that i know you think has been done to voting rights in the protection of minority voting rights in this
new ruling. north carolina, same deal. republicans had been holding back from voter i.d. there because they knew it would be too racially discriminatory to pass the preclearance requirement. now that that requirement is is gone, hey, full steam ahead. now we can go with the full bill, says the republican rules committee chairman in north carolina s republican-controlled senate. why stop just with voter i.d., he says? he predicted an omnibus voting bill would surface in the senate next week that could go beyond voter i.d. to include issues such as reducing early voting, eliminating sunday voting and barring same-day voter registration. they might not have been able to get away with racially discriminatory policies like that before today, but as of 10:00 a.m. today, go for it. the flood gates are open. the flood gates are open. anything these states with a history of racial discrimination could not get away with before, because they were covered under the voting rights act, and the just