Democracy Explainers

What is The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act?

The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act (JLVRAA), originally named The Voting Rights Advancement Act (VRAA), is a critical piece of proposed federal legislation. If passed, the JLVRAA would restore The Voting Rights Act of 1965 and create more free and fair elections. Nearly 70% of voters support its passage. 

The bill was renamed after the passing of Congressman and civil rights leader John Lewis who led marchers on Bloody Sunday, which became a turning point for the passage of The Voting Rights Act a few months later. 

While there was an earlier version of the VRAA, today the acronyms JLVRAA and VRAA can be used interchangeably.

Why is the VRAA needed?

The Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling in Shelby County v. Holder significantly weakened the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA). Designed to prevent racial discrimination in voting, the VRA is widely considered one of the most important pieces of legislation in our country’s history. 

The Supreme Court’s decision invalidated Section 4b of the VRA essentially saying it was outdated. Section 4b outlined the formula that determined which jurisdictions had to seek preclearance from the federal government. Preclearance required these jurisdictions to obtain federal approval before making any changes to their election laws. Preclearance proactively prevented discriminatory policies from ever going into effect in the first place and was considered the real power of the VRA.

The Supreme Court placed the responsibility of updating the formula in the hands of Congress. Despite multiple attempts, Congress has failed to pass legislation to update the formula and restore the VRA.

How has the Shelby County v Holder decision impacted voter access?

By invalidating the formula, the 2013 decision effectively made it so no jurisdiction has to seek preclearance. In other words, jurisdictions with a long history of discrimination are able to pass election laws we have not seen since before 1965. As a result, there has been a wave of discriminatory changes to election policy since Shelby Co. v Holder.

Even election officials, those tasked with the administering of elections, have reported difficulty keeping up with the constantly changing election policies and the logistical implementation of such policies.

Many of these laws would not have been allowed if the Voting Rights Act was still in full effect. Enacting strict voter ID requirements; closing polling locations in communities of color; reducing early vote days and hours; and voter roll purging under the guise of cleaning voter rolls are just a few of the discriminatory practices seen since Shelby Co. v Holder.

The wave of changes to election policy has resulted in a growing racial turnout gap in several states. The gap has grown by at least 9% in five of the six states originally covered by preclearance since Shelby County. The Washington Post found that the white-Black turnout gap rose to 11% in 2022, the largest it has been since at least 2000. Alabama, Georgia, and Texas are among the states that have seen the largest gap increases.

Contrary to popular belief, elections are often won by a small margin. Voter suppression works by making it harder and preventing certain groups of voters from casting a ballot, thereby influencing the election.

What is the process for challenging discriminatory policies?

Under preclearance, the jurisdiction had to petition the U.S. Department of Justice to change election law. The petitioning jurisdiction had to proactively demonstrate that their proposed changes would not discriminate against voters. Voting and civil rights organizations would become aware of the proposed change and often make a recommendation based on their own analysis. The Department of Justice would conduct its own review and determine whether or not to allow the change.

Since 2013, discriminatory laws can be enacted without the awareness of civil and voting rights organizations and without the scrutiny of organizations or The Department of Justice. 

As a result, organizations must monitor voting policies all over the country and challenge discriminatory policies in court, often after they’ve been enacted. This is more difficult, expensive, and time-consuming for voters and voting rights organizations. This includes gathering evidence, proving standing, filing a lawsuit, and potentially going through a lengthy court battle.

These legal battles may not even start until after an election has been held with the discriminatory policy in place. By affecting who is able to vote through discriminatory policies, jurisdictions can skew election results and influence the outcomes of elections.

How would The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act (JLVRAA) impact voting and election policy?

The JLVRAA proposes a new, updated formula for determining which state and local governments have a consistent pattern of discrimination in voting. With a new formula, these jurisdictions would once again be subject to preclearance, thereby preventing discriminatory voting policies before they are implemented.

The JLVRAA also includes provisions to increase transparency and empower voters:

• Requiring reasonable public notice be given for voting changes, providing citizens with enough time and information to understand how these changes might affect their ability to vote. 
• Enhancing the ability of affected citizens to challenge these changes in court, ensuring that they have legal recourse if their voting rights are compromised.

The JLVRAA seeks to reaffirm that the right to vote is a fundamental aspect of democracy and that every voter, regardless of their race or background, should have equal access to voting.

Why hasn’t Congress passed the VRAA to restore The Voting Rights Act?

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was renewed and even expanded five times since 1965 with very little opposition. The most recent reauthorization, signed into law by George W. Bush in 2006, was adopted under a Republican controlled House, Senate and Presidency. In fact, the bill passed unanimously in the Senate 98-0 in fewer than three months from when it was introduced to becoming law.

Seventeen of the Senators who voted for the 2006 reauthorization of the VRA have rejected attempts to restore the legislation since the 2013 Supreme Court decision. They include Senators McConnell (retiring), Grassley, Shelby (former), Crapo, Collins, Burr (former), Inhofe (former), Graham, Thune, Cornyn, Blackburn, Blunt (former), Boozman, Capito, Moran, Murkowski, and Wicker. 

Despite nearly 70% of voters supporting the JLVRAA, Congress has yet to pass the legislation, but not for lack of trying. For nearly a decade, some form of the VRAA has been introduced into every Congress since 2013 (see footnote below). 

To date, the furthest the bill has gotten was in 2021 when it was combined with the The Freedom to Vote Act (S. 2747), as the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act (H.R. 5746). The combined bill was passed in the House, but the filibuster was used to prevent the bill from being put to a vote in the Senate. With a 50:50 split and Vice President Kamala Harris as the deciding vote, the bill would have almost certainly passed. 

Due to current Senate Filibuster rules, a minimum of 60 votes are needed to avoid or end a filibuster, even if the bill had enough votes to pass in an official vote. This is called cloture. In a 49-51 cloture vote, the bill didn’t receive the necessary votes to be brought to an official vote on the bill. This brought an immediate challenge to the current Senate rules to at least restore an earlier version of the filibuster – the talking filibuster – in which lawmakers who wished to block a vote would actually have to speak for as long as they could on the Senate floor to delay a vote, rather than just threaten to do it. The vote to change Senate rules did not pass.

Thus, The Freedom to Vote: John R Lewis Act was never brought to a simple majority vote in the Senate. The JVRAA has since been reintroduced again.  

Why does the JLVRAA keep being reintroduced?

The act and the fight to get it passed underscores the importance of vigilance in protecting voting rights and reminds us that the fight for equality is far from over. Given its importance, it will likely continue to be introduced until it is passed.

It’s critical to get elected officials on record on whether or not they support equal access to the vote, regardless of race, ethnicity, or background.

How You Can Support The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act

It’s crucial that we restore the Voting Rights Act. Here are just a few things you can do to help:

• Register to vote or check your registration status so you can vote for pro-voting, pro-democracy candidates

• Contact your Senators and Representatives and let them know you want them to restore the VRA by passing the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act

• Stay informed about federal voting rights bills like The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act and The Freedom to Vote Act 

Your voice counts, so make sure you’re heard by voting and contacting your elected leaders today!

---

Footnote: The History of the VRAA in Congress Since 2013

• 2013 – 2014: The VRAA was first introduced and stalled (H.R. 3899/S. 1945)
  • 113th Congressional Makeup
    • Senate: 53 Democrats (+2 Independents) and 45 Republicans
    • House: 234 Republicans and 201 Democrats

• 2015 – 2016: The VRAA was reintroduced and stalled (H.R. 2867/S. 1659)
  • 114th Congressional Makeup
    • Senate: 54 Republicans and 44 Democrats (+2 Independents)
    • House: 247 Republicans and 188 Democrats

• 2017 – 2018: The VRAA was reintroduced and stalled (H.R. 2978/S. 1419)
  • 115th Congressional Makeup
    • Senate: 51 Republicans and 47 Democrats (+2 Independents)
    • House: 241 Republicans and 194 Democrats

• 2019 – 2020: The VRAA was introduced. The bill passed the House. In the Senate, the bill was sent to the judiciary committee where it was stalled. (H.R. 4/S. 561). The bill was renamed The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to honor the late Congressman days after his passing in 2020. (S. 4263).
  • 116th Congressional Makeup
    • Senate: 53 Republicans and 45 Democrats (+2 Independents)
    • House: 235 Democrats and 199 Republicans

• 2021 – 2022: The JVRAA was reintroduced (H.R. 4/S. 4) and later combined with The Freedom to Vote Act (S. 2747) as the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act (H.R. 5746) The combined bill passed the House. The filibuster was used to block the combined bill in the Senate. The Senate lacks 60 votes needed to override the filibuster.
  • 117th Congressional Makeup
    • Senate: 50 Republicans and 48 Democrats (+2 Independents)
    • House: 222 Democrats and 212 Republicans

• 2023 – 2024: The JVRAA was reintroduced (H.R. 14/S. 4)
  • 118th Congressional Makeup
    • Senate: 47 Democrats (+4 Independents) and 49 Republicans
    • House: 222 Republicans and 213 Democrats

Published June 25, 2024