TruthOrFake Logo
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: Supreme Court's conservative majority has limited Voting Rights Act protections since 2013.

Fact Check: Supreme Court's conservative majority has limited Voting Rights Act protections since 2013.

Published June 28, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
✓
VERDICT
True

# Fact Check: Supreme Court's Conservative Majority Has Limited Voting Rights Act Protections Since 2013 ## What We Know The claim that the Supreme C...

Fact Check: Supreme Court's Conservative Majority Has Limited Voting Rights Act Protections Since 2013

What We Know

The claim that the Supreme Court's conservative majority has limited Voting Rights Act protections since 2013 is supported by significant legal developments. In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled in Shelby County v. Holder, striking down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) that established a formula for determining which jurisdictions required federal approval before making changes to their voting laws. This ruling effectively nullified the preclearance requirement for nine states, which had been designed to prevent racial discrimination in voting practices (NPR source-2). Since then, various cases have emerged that further challenge and potentially weaken the protections afforded by the VRA, particularly Section 2, which prohibits voting practices that discriminate based on race (AP News source-3).

In recent years, the Supreme Court has continued to hear cases related to redistricting and voting rights, with decisions that have raised concerns among civil rights advocates about the erosion of protections for minority voters. For instance, the Court's decision in a 2023 Alabama redistricting case upheld previous rulings that could limit the effectiveness of Section 2 (NPR source-1).

Analysis

The evidence supporting the claim is robust, as it is backed by a series of Supreme Court decisions that have systematically reduced the scope of the Voting Rights Act since 2013. The Shelby County decision is particularly pivotal, as it removed federal oversight that had been crucial in preventing discriminatory practices in states with a history of voting discrimination. Legal experts have noted that this ruling has led to a resurgence of laws and practices that could disenfranchise minority voters (NPR source-2).

Furthermore, the ongoing litigation surrounding cases like Louisiana v. Callais indicates that the conservative majority of the Supreme Court is likely to continue shaping the legal landscape of voting rights in a manner that could further limit protections. Experts suggest that the Court's reluctance to make definitive rulings in these cases may reflect internal divisions about the future of the Voting Rights Act (NPR source-1).

However, it is important to note that while the Court has made decisions that limit protections, the full extent of these limitations will depend on future rulings and legislative actions. The reliability of sources discussing these developments varies, but major news outlets and legal experts provide a consensus view that aligns with the claim.

Conclusion

The verdict is True. The Supreme Court's conservative majority has indeed limited Voting Rights Act protections since 2013, primarily through its ruling in Shelby County v. Holder and subsequent decisions that have undermined the enforcement of the Act. The ongoing legal battles and the Court's handling of redistricting cases suggest a trend that could further erode these protections in the future.

Sources

  1. Supreme Court punts on Louisiana redistricting, voting rights
  2. What Changes After Supreme Court Ruling On Voting Rights Act
  3. Supreme Court tossed out heart of Voting Rights Act a ...
  4. Voting Rights Act's legal challenges to watch in 2024
  5. SUPREME FONT - forum | dafont.com
  6. Supreme Court Ready to Gut Last Vestige of Voting Rights ...
  7. supreme x corteiz - forum | dafont.com
  8. Network Font | dafont.com

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on abortion rights since 1973.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on abortion rights since 1973.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on abortion rights since 1973.

Jul 3, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Abortions are actually up since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Abortions are actually up since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Abortions are actually up since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

Jul 5, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Roe v. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court decision on abortion rights.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Roe v. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court decision on abortion rights.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Roe v. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court decision on abortion rights.

Jul 3, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: Paul Krugman Paul Krugman We’re All Rats Now Time to take a stand, again, against racism Paul Krugman Jun 30, 2025 Zohran Mamdani’s upset victory in New York’s Democratic primary has created panic in MAGAland. Stephen Miller, the architect of Donald Trump’s deportation policies, waxed apocalyptic: Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary, declared that New York is about to turn into “Caracas on the Hudson.” And Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama basically declared New York’s voters subhuman, saying: These inner-city rats, they live off the federal government. And that’s one reason we’re $37 trillion in debt. And it’s time we find these rats and we send them back home, that are living off the American taxpayers that are working very hard every week to pay taxes. These reactions are vile, and they’re also dishonest. Whatever these men may claim, it’s all about bigotry. Miller isn’t concerned about the state of New York “society.” What bothers him is the idea of nonwhite people having political power. Bessent isn’t really deeply worried about Zamdani’s economic ideas. But he feels free, maybe even obliged, to slander a foreign-born Muslim with language he would never use about a white Christian politician, even if that politician were (like some of his colleagues in the Trump administration) a total crackpot. And while Tuberville stands out even within his caucus as an ignorant fool, his willingness to use dehumanizing language about millions of people shows that raw racism is rapidly becoming mainstream in American politics. Remember, during the campaign both Trump and JD Vance amplified the slanders about Haitians eating pets. And now that they’re in office, you can see the resurgence of raw racism all across Trump administration policies, large and small. You can see it, for example, in the cuts at the National Institutes of Health, which are so tilted against racial minorities that a federal judge — one appointed by Ronald Reagan! — declared I’ve never seen a record where racial discrimination was so palpable. I’ve sat on this bench now for 40 years. I’ve never seen government racial discrimination like this. You can see it in the renaming of military bases after Confederate generals — that is, traitors who fought for slavery. You can even see it in a change in the military’s shaving policy that is clearly custom-designed to drive Black men — who account for around a quarter of the Army’s new recruits — out of the service. So racism and bigotry are back, big time. Who’s safe? Nobody. Are you a legal immigrant? Well, the Supreme Court just allowed Trump to summarily strip half a million U.S. residents of that status, and only a fool would imagine that this is the end of the story. Anyway, when masked men who claim to be ICE agents but refuse to show identification are grabbing people off the streets because they think those people look illegal, does legal status even matter? Does it even matter if you’re a U.S. citizen? And the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is set to massively increase ICE’s funding — basically setting up a huge national secret police force. Now, maybe you imagine that you yourself won’t suffer from this new reign of bigotry and imagine that everyone you care about is similarly safe. But if that’s what you think, you’re likely to face a rude awakening. I personally don’t have any illusions of safety. Yes, I’m a native-born white citizen. But my wife and her family are Black, and some of my friends and relatives are foreign-born U.S. citizens. Furthermore, I’m Jewish, and anyone who knows their history realizes that whenever right-wing bigotry is on the ascendant, we’re always next in line. Are there really people out there naïve enough to believe MAGA’s claims to be against antisemitism, who can’t see the transparent cynicism and dishonesty? The fact is that the Trump administration already contains a number of figures with strong ties to antisemitic extremists. The Great Replacement Theory, which has de facto become part of MAGA’s ideology, doesn’t just say that there’s a conspiracy to replace whites with people of color; it says that it’s a Jewish conspiracy. So I’m definitely scared of what the many antisemites inside or with close ties to the Trump administration may eventually do. And no, I’m not frightened at all by the prospect that New York may soon have a somewhat leftist Muslim mayor. Anyway, my personal fears are beside the point. Everyone who cares about keeping America America needs to take a stand against the resurgence of bigotry. Because the truth is that we’re all rats now. MUSICAL CODA Discussion about this post Michael Roseman Jun 30 Edited For a while, American bigotry was ashamed of itself. Or pretended to be. Now it runs the government. Reply Share 106 replies Megan Rothery Jun 30 Edited Take a stand - Call. Write. Email. Protest. Unrelentingly. Use/share this spreadsheet as a resource to call/email/write members of Congress, the Cabinet and news organizations. Reach out to those in your own state, as well as those in others. Use your voice and make some “good trouble” ❤️‍🩹🤍💙 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13lYafj0P-6owAJcH-5_xcpcRvMUZI7rkBPW-Ma9e7hw/edit?usp=drivesdk Reply Share 31 replies 852 more comments... No posts Ready for more? © 2025 Paul Krugman Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice Start writing Get the app Substack is the home for great culture

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Paul Krugman Paul Krugman We’re All Rats Now Time to take a stand, again, against racism Paul Krugman Jun 30, 2025 Zohran Mamdani’s upset victory in New York’s Democratic primary has created panic in MAGAland. Stephen Miller, the architect of Donald Trump’s deportation policies, waxed apocalyptic: Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary, declared that New York is about to turn into “Caracas on the Hudson.” And Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama basically declared New York’s voters subhuman, saying: These inner-city rats, they live off the federal government. And that’s one reason we’re $37 trillion in debt. And it’s time we find these rats and we send them back home, that are living off the American taxpayers that are working very hard every week to pay taxes. These reactions are vile, and they’re also dishonest. Whatever these men may claim, it’s all about bigotry. Miller isn’t concerned about the state of New York “society.” What bothers him is the idea of nonwhite people having political power. Bessent isn’t really deeply worried about Zamdani’s economic ideas. But he feels free, maybe even obliged, to slander a foreign-born Muslim with language he would never use about a white Christian politician, even if that politician were (like some of his colleagues in the Trump administration) a total crackpot. And while Tuberville stands out even within his caucus as an ignorant fool, his willingness to use dehumanizing language about millions of people shows that raw racism is rapidly becoming mainstream in American politics. Remember, during the campaign both Trump and JD Vance amplified the slanders about Haitians eating pets. And now that they’re in office, you can see the resurgence of raw racism all across Trump administration policies, large and small. You can see it, for example, in the cuts at the National Institutes of Health, which are so tilted against racial minorities that a federal judge — one appointed by Ronald Reagan! — declared I’ve never seen a record where racial discrimination was so palpable. I’ve sat on this bench now for 40 years. I’ve never seen government racial discrimination like this. You can see it in the renaming of military bases after Confederate generals — that is, traitors who fought for slavery. You can even see it in a change in the military’s shaving policy that is clearly custom-designed to drive Black men — who account for around a quarter of the Army’s new recruits — out of the service. So racism and bigotry are back, big time. Who’s safe? Nobody. Are you a legal immigrant? Well, the Supreme Court just allowed Trump to summarily strip half a million U.S. residents of that status, and only a fool would imagine that this is the end of the story. Anyway, when masked men who claim to be ICE agents but refuse to show identification are grabbing people off the streets because they think those people look illegal, does legal status even matter? Does it even matter if you’re a U.S. citizen? And the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is set to massively increase ICE’s funding — basically setting up a huge national secret police force. Now, maybe you imagine that you yourself won’t suffer from this new reign of bigotry and imagine that everyone you care about is similarly safe. But if that’s what you think, you’re likely to face a rude awakening. I personally don’t have any illusions of safety. Yes, I’m a native-born white citizen. But my wife and her family are Black, and some of my friends and relatives are foreign-born U.S. citizens. Furthermore, I’m Jewish, and anyone who knows their history realizes that whenever right-wing bigotry is on the ascendant, we’re always next in line. Are there really people out there naïve enough to believe MAGA’s claims to be against antisemitism, who can’t see the transparent cynicism and dishonesty? The fact is that the Trump administration already contains a number of figures with strong ties to antisemitic extremists. The Great Replacement Theory, which has de facto become part of MAGA’s ideology, doesn’t just say that there’s a conspiracy to replace whites with people of color; it says that it’s a Jewish conspiracy. So I’m definitely scared of what the many antisemites inside or with close ties to the Trump administration may eventually do. And no, I’m not frightened at all by the prospect that New York may soon have a somewhat leftist Muslim mayor. Anyway, my personal fears are beside the point. Everyone who cares about keeping America America needs to take a stand against the resurgence of bigotry. Because the truth is that we’re all rats now. MUSICAL CODA Discussion about this post Michael Roseman Jun 30 Edited For a while, American bigotry was ashamed of itself. Or pretended to be. Now it runs the government. Reply Share 106 replies Megan Rothery Jun 30 Edited Take a stand - Call. Write. Email. Protest. Unrelentingly. Use/share this spreadsheet as a resource to call/email/write members of Congress, the Cabinet and news organizations. Reach out to those in your own state, as well as those in others. Use your voice and make some “good trouble” ❤️‍🩹🤍💙 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13lYafj0P-6owAJcH-5_xcpcRvMUZI7rkBPW-Ma9e7hw/edit?usp=drivesdk Reply Share 31 replies 852 more comments... No posts Ready for more? © 2025 Paul Krugman Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice Start writing Get the app Substack is the home for great culture

Jul 20, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: The Wisconsin Supreme Court has a liberal majority.
Unverified

Fact Check: The Wisconsin Supreme Court has a liberal majority.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The Wisconsin Supreme Court has a liberal majority.

Jul 3, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Kim Davis was jailed in 2015 for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. She is now trying to get the Supreme Court to overturn same-sex marriage, likened to Roe v. Wade.
True

Fact Check: Kim Davis was jailed in 2015 for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. She is now trying to get the Supreme Court to overturn same-sex marriage, likened to Roe v. Wade.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Kim Davis was jailed in 2015 for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. She is now trying to get the Supreme Court to overturn same-sex marriage, likened to Roe v. Wade.

Aug 18, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks