8th Circuit Decides To Wildly Limit Enforcement Of The Voting Rights Act

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

67% : Indeed, a private right of action was very much anticipated when the Voting Rights Act was initially passed.
57% : And, perhaps more to point, this private right of action was used as a justification when the Supreme Court got down to the business of gutting voting rights.
54% : "Hell, *even* the Fifth Circuit found an implied private right of action under the Voting Rights Act.
54% : 'Holding that Section Two does not provide a private right of action would work a major upheaval in the law, and [I am] not prepared to step down that road today.'
51% : "And Kareem Crayton, Senior Director for Voting Rights and Representation at the Brennan Center, says this decision is "wildly out of step with existing case law" and "radically upends the existing understanding of Section 2."
34% : Writing for the majority, Judge David R. Stras said there is no private right of action under that law, and "The Voting Rights Act lists only one plaintiff who can enforce § 2: the Attorney General.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.