Voting rights advocates, Dems slam ‘devastating’ SCOTUS ruling gutting Voting Rights Act

Voting rights advocates, Democrats and legal experts expressed horror and outrage over the Supreme Court’s decision to weaken a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, warning the ruling could make it almost impossible to challenge racial discrimination in redistricting and voting.

“Light a candle in memory of the Voting Rights Act, which died today, aged 60,” one top legal scholar wrote. 

The backlash Wednesday was swift and forceful, with critics describing the ruling as the latest in a series of decisions that have steadily eroded one of the nation’s most important civil rights laws.

“Today’s decision is a devastating blow to what remains of the Voting Rights Act, and a license for corrupt politicians who want to rig the system by silencing entire communities. The Supreme Court betrayed Black voters, they betrayed America, and they betrayed our democracy,” NAACP President Derrick Johnson said in a statement. “This ruling is a major setback for our nation and threatens to erode the hard-won victories we’ve fought, bled, and died for. But the people still can fight back. Our best defense and offense is the ballot box, and we’re going to turn out voters in the midterm elections to make sure we can elect representatives who look out for us. Our democracy is crying for help.” 

The court’s decision massively raises the bar for proving violations under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act — now requiring evidence of intentional discrimination, which is notoriously hard to prove, rather than simply showing that a law or map has discriminatory effects. 

Voting rights advocates say that shift will make challenges against racially discriminatory maps and voting laws nearly impossible to win.

“It serves as just one more example of how a majority of the current Court seems intent on abandoning its vital role in ensuring equal participation in our democracy and protecting the rights of minority groups against majority overreach,” former President Barack Obama said. “The good news is that such setbacks can be overcome. But that will only happen if citizens across the country who cherish our democratic ideals continue to mobilize and vote in record numbers – not just in the upcoming midterms or in high profile races, but in every election and every level.”

Democratic leaders further warned the consequences could be immediate, particularly in states where maps have already been challenged for diluting minority voting power.

Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin called the ruling “a dark day for America,” saying the court had “effectively killed Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act” and set back the fight for racial justice. 

“While today’s decision is a gut punch, make no mistake,” Martin said. “Democrats will fight tooth and nail to ensure the voices of all Americans will be heard in November and in every election that follows.”

House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D) warned the decision would have far-reaching consequences for fair representation nationwide.

“The consequences will be felt across the country: fewer voices heard, fewer communities represented and a democracy diminished,” Pelosi said, urging Congress to restore the law’s full protections. “Congress must urgently pass the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to restore the full strength of the Voting Rights Act before this latest blow becomes fatal.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) emphasized the ruling continues a broader erosion of voting rights protections by the court’s conservative supermajority.

“The Supreme Court majority continues to gut the Voting Rights Act and vital protections for our democracy and fair representation,” Newsom said, adding that states like California “will not sit back” and “will continue to take action to safeguard our democracy for the generations to come.”

New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) also criticized the ruling, tying it to the long historic fight over voting rights protections.

“The Supreme Court’s decision to restrict the Voting Rights Act weakens one of our most powerful civil rights laws,” James said, adding that the ruling “dishonors” the legacy of the landmark legislation.

Advocates said the decision could accelerate a new wave of gerrymandering by removing one of the last legal tools used to challenge racist maps.

“This decision opens the door to racially discriminatory maps that are harder to challenge. Without a strong Section 2, politicians will be incentivized to draw maps that lock voters of color and candidates out of power, chipping away at one of democracy’s core tenets,” Michael McNulty of nonprofit Issue One said. “When incumbents can cherry-pick their voters, the public’s voice gets weaker.” 

Hannah Fried, CEO of All Voting is Local, said the ruling “strips Black voters of fair and equal representation” and makes it harder for historically excluded communities to have their voices heard.

“When politicians choose their voters instead of voters choosing their leaders, we all lose,” Fried said. “We will not let this decision dishearten us. We remain clear-eyed and driven. We will continue to focus on building a democracy we deserve—one that invites people in, not one that keeps people out.”

Legal experts indicated the ruling could leave Section 2 largely hollow and irrelevant in practice.

“Light a candle in memory of the Voting Rights Act, which died today, aged 60,” election law professor Nicholas Stephanopoulos wrote. “Section 2 wasn’t officially struck down. But it might as well have been. It’s now useless to minority voters under virtually all circumstances.” 

Republican officials and conservative groups, meanwhile, praised the decision, arguing it restores constitutional limits on the use of race in redistricting.

Republican National Committee chair Joe Gruters called the ruling “a win for fairness and the rule of law,” framing it as a victory for what conservatives have described as race-neutral election laws.

Other Trump allies agreed.

“This is a big day in constitutional law,” DOJ Civil Rights Division chief Harmeet Dhillon wrote, arguing the ruling ensures the Voting Rights Act is used to prevent discrimination “rather than requiring it to engineer racial outcomes.”  

The Public Interest Legal Foundation, a right-wing group, also celebrated the decision, referring to it as a “moment of courage” and comparing it to landmark civil rights rulings against racial discrimination.

Adam Kincaid, president of the National Republican Redistricting Trust and architect of several GOP gerrymanders, said the ruling “rebukes” efforts to draw districts based on race, arguing it restores what he called the Constitution’s “colorblind” principles.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), a candidate for governor, urged her state legislature to redraw districts to add another Republican seat, saying it was “essential” to cement President Donald Trump’s agenda — a signal of how the decision could immediately accelerate GOP gerrymander efforts.