Abstract
For decades, changes in the interpretation and application of federal election law have limited the reach of hard-won protections for voters of color enshrined in the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (the federal VRA). United States Supreme Court opinions, including Shelby County v. Holder, Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee and Louisiana v. Callais, have rendered the core provisions of the federal VRA wholly ineffective. Against this backdrop, State Voting Rights Acts (SVRAs) have emerged as a necessary and urgent response to protect the right to vote—not merely filling the gaps left by federal retrenchment, but building the durable, state-driven framework that the moment demands.
This Article builds on a growing universe of scholarship concerning SVRAs by (1) identifying lines of federal case law that have undermined the protections of the federal VRA and caused harm to voters of color; and (2) explaining how many of these harms can be addressed or mitigated by specific SVRA provisions that have been adopted i n one or more states or are currently under consideration in state legislatures.
The federal VRA, as it has long been understood, is no longer. Those committed to voting rights must now turn to building something new: a more resilient, state-driven framework for protecting voting rights in an era of federal withdrawal.
Volume
110
Issue
6
Page
2549
Year
2026
Recommended Citation
Michael Pernick & Adam Harper,
State VRAs and the State of the VRA,
110
Minn. L. Rev.
2549
(2026).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/minnlrev/vol110/iss6/2
Rights
http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/
Publication Abbreviation
Minn. L. Rev.
