Rep. Mel Watt (D-NC) who was present for much of the proceedings, said, “he [Kennedy] asked very adversarial sounding questions to the other side and you think, this guy may be on our side.” Then Watt added,
“As soon as the lawyers on the other side get up there he’s asking adversarial questions to them so what do you read from that?” Watt added.
Watt, a graduate of Yale Law School, is perhaps the most knowledgeable member of the current Congress on voting rights issues. Watt conducts a summit on the issue at the annual Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s Legislative Conference and led the Voting Rights Act through its last congressional reauthorization.
CBC Chair Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-OH) also attended the oral arguments last week. She expressed the same view as did Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL). Both attended last week’s oral arguments at the Supreme Court on the case of Shelby County vs. Holder — a case many fear may gut Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. “Clearly Anthony Kennedy is the deciding vote,” Fudge said stating the obvious.
“I couldn’t tell which way Kennedy was going,” Brown said. Brown’s state of Florida endured several changes in voting laws during the 2012 elections. The changes included eliminating days Floridians could vote early and ending Sunday voting. Brown sued the state over the changes.
The oral arguments were noteworthy for a statement made by Associate Justice Antonin Scalia. Scalia, making what sounded to many like a political assessment rather than a legal one, asserted that Voting Rights Act had become a kind of “racial entitlement,” that has become difficult to get rid of for politically correct reasons.
During an interview with Politic365 last week, Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) said he was “stunned” by what Scalia said. Lewis was referring to Scalia saying that the Voting Rights Act was an example of the “perpetuation of racial entitlement.”
As he spoke with Rev. Al Sharpton on MSNBC, Lewis commented on Justice Scalia’s comments saying, “It was unreal, unbelieveanle almost shocking to hear a member of the court use that language. It is appaling to me … It is an affront to what people in the civil rights fought and died for.”