Dear South Central LAMP Community,
Who Has the Right to Vote?
In this next Truth Telling series, I want to talk about what we’ve been learning about the Supreme Court and its decisions towards the Voting Rights Act of 1965. But first, what is the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and why was it needed if the 15th Amendment already existed? Let me explain.
In the February newsletter, I shared that much of what is happening in our country today is directly tied to the end of slavery. After slavery ended, the United States passed the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments. These amendments were intended to protect newly freed Black Americans. However, during this same period, former confederate soldiers created the KKK, sundown towns spread across the country, and “separate but equal” became the norm.
Although these amendments existed on paper, states still held enormous power over the day-to-day lives of Black Americans, especially in the South. In many ways, these protections became performative because states continued creating systems that denied Black Americans equal rights and opportunities.
So why was the Voting Rights Act of 1965 necessary if the 15th Amendment already prohibited denying someone the right to vote based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude?
Despite the 15th Amendment, many states continued finding ways to suppress Black voters. They imposed poll taxes, literacy tests, and other barriers designed to prevent Black Americans from voting. During the Jim Crow era, politicians also manipulated voting district maps to weaken Black political power — a practice known as gerrymandering.
One tactic involved dividing Black communities into multiple districts so that Black voters no longer made up a majority in any one district. As a result, politicians no longer needed Black voters to win elections and therefore had little incentive to represent their interests. Another tactic combined multiple Black-majority areas into a single district, limiting the number of representatives Black communities could elect overall.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was created to stop these discriminatory practices and protect the voting rights of Black Americans. However, over time, this Supreme Court has weakened parts of the Act, reducing federal oversight of states with histories of voter suppression. Many critics argue these decisions have made it easier for states to pass laws that disproportionately impact voters of color, particularly in the South.
While the Voting Rights Act was specifically created to protect Black voters, it is important to recognize that this country has repeatedly questioned the legitimacy and citizenship of communities of color more broadly. During the 1920s and 1930s, the U.S. government forcibly removed an estimated 1 to 2 million people of Mexican descent to Mexico, despite the fact that approximately 60% were U.S. citizens. During World War II, the U.S. government forcibly removed, relocated and incarcerated approximately 120,000 Japanese Americans, two-thirds of whom were U.S. citizens.
During the 1830s, the U.S. government forcibly removed tens of thousands of Native Americans from their ancestral lands through policies such as the Indian Removal Act. These were Indigenous peoples whose presence on this land predated the United States itself.
What does all of this have to do with immigration?
Everything.
The debate around immigration is also deeply connected to political power and voting power. When immigrants and communities of color are portrayed as outsiders, criminals, or less deserving of belonging, it becomes easier to question not only their legitimacy, but their children’s legitimacy, along with their voices, and eventually their rights.
We are seeing renewed debates around birthright citizenship and who should be considered “truly” American. These conversations are not new. Communities of color in this country have faced challenges not only with their belonging and citizenship, but also their humanity for generations. Dehumanizing the other has been common practice in order to legally take power from communities of color.
As we build a more just future, we must reckon with this history and ensure that no one’s humanity, legitimacy and their right to participate in democracy is threatened because of their race, ethnicity, or background and we must ensure to change laws, policies and systems that have failed to do so.
In partnership,
Diana Z. Pinto
Executive Director