"The Totality of Circumstances": The Rise and Fall of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act

Abstract

In the wake of “Bloody Sunday,” the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was enacted to eliminate racial discrimination in voting. Section 2 granted voters of color both the formal right to be free from discriminatory voting practices and the practical ability to sue states for violations. Over time, the Act expanded in scope and became the most powerful civil rights legislation in American history. This thesis argues that an effective system of interbranch dialogue produced Section 2’s early success and expanded minority voting and representational rights despite unresolved doctrinal flaws. However, under conditions of increasing juridification, the Supreme Court incrementally constrained Section 2 through several judicial mechanisms: (1) doctrinal layering; (2) judicial abstention; (3) the imposition of temporal limits on race-conscious remedies; and (4) doctrinal narrowing through rigorous case-by-case evidentiary rulings. These developments introduced constitutional tensions, enabled race-as-party defenses, and privileged evidence of racial progress over current discrimination. Although broader political shifts contributed to statutory diminishment, this thesis finds that the Court’s deployment of these judicial tools has been most instrumental in Section 2’s decline. It concludes by analyzing Louisiana v. Callais, the case poised to eliminate Section 2 as a whole, and offers legislative and legal strategies for preserving multiracial democracy in a post-Voting Rights Act landscape.