Federal

John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2023

Source: Congress.gov · 17,751 words in original text

What This Bill Does

This bill updates the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to create new ways to identify and challenge voting practices that harm minority voters. It replaces an old system with a new one based on voting violations that occurred in the past 25 years rather than registration data from the 1960s-70s. The bill also adds new requirements for states and local governments to get approval before making certain voting changes and requires them to publicly announce voting rule changes. ##

Who It Affects

- States and local political subdivisions (counties, cities, school districts) - The U.S. Attorney General (implements requirements and reviews voting changes) - Voters, especially minority voters and language minority groups - Election officials who manage voter registration and polling places - People with disabilities voting - Courts that hear voting rights cases ##

Key Provisions

- Courts must use new standards to determine if voting practices illegally dilute minority voting strength, deny or abridge voting rights, or discriminate based on race, color, or language minority status (Sec. 2) - States and local governments with 15 or more voting rights violations in the previous 25 years become subject to federal oversight requirements for 10 years (Sec. 5(a)(1)) - States and local governments must get federal approval before implementing certain voting changes like adding at-large voting seats, changing voter identification requirements, or reducing voting locations, in jurisdictions with significant minority populations (Sec. 6) - States and local governments must publicly announce any voting rule changes at least 48 hours after making them, with details about what changed (Sec. 7) - The Attorney General must publish lists of voting rights violations each year and determine which jurisdictions need federal oversight (Sec. 5(a)(4)) ##

What Changes

**If this bill becomes law:** States and local governments will face federal oversight if they have had multiple voting rights violations in the past 25 years instead of based on old data from 1965-1972. They will need permission from federal courts or the Attorney General before making significant voting changes in areas with large minority populations. Courts will be able to stop unfair voting practices using broader standards that consider whether rules create greater burdens on minority voters. Election officials must publicly disclose information about polling places, voting machines, and poll workers before each federal election. Any person harmed by voting discrimination, not just the Attorney General, can file lawsuits to challenge voting practices. States and local governments will need to announce voting changes quickly and publicly explain what changed. ##

Important Definitions

- **Voting rights violation:** A court finding of illegal voting discrimination, a denied request for federal approval of a voting change, a federal official's objection to a voting change, or a settlement where someone admitted to voting discrimination (Sec. 5(a)(3)) - **Protected class:** Groups protected from voting discrimination based on race, color, or membership in a language minority group (Sec. 2) - **Vote dilution:** When a voting system or practice reduces the ability of a minority group to elect candidates they prefer (Sec. 2(b)) - **Covered practice:** Specific voting changes that require federal approval, including changes to how elections are conducted, voting locations, voter identification requirements, and voter registration list maintenance (Sec. 4A(b)) - **Language minority group:** Not explicitly defined in the bill text - **Demographic group:** Each group that Section 2 protects from voting discrimination based on race, color, or language minority status (Sec. 6) ##

Effective Date

Changes requiring transparency (public notice of voting changes) take effect 60 days after the bill becomes law (Sec. 7(b)). All other provisions take effect upon enactment. Not specified in bill text for most other sections.

I 118TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION H. R. 14 To amend the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to revise the criteria for determining which States and political subdivisions are subject to section 4 of the Act, and for other purposes. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SEPTEMBER 19, 2023 Ms. SEWELL (for herself, Mr. JEFFRIES, Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts, Mr. AGUILAR, Mr. CLYBURN, Mr. HORSFORD, Ms. BARRAGA´N, Ms. CHU, Mr. NADLER, Mr. MORELLE, Mr. VEASEY, Mr. SCOTT of Virginia, Ms. WIL- LIAMS of Georgia, Ms. JACKSON LEE, Mr. LARSEN of Washington, Ms. ADAMS, Mrs. BEATTY, Mr. CARTWRIGHT, Mr. CASTRO of Texas, Mr. BISHOP of Georgia, Mr. GREEN of Texas, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia, Ms. LEE of California, Ms. BONAMICI, Mr. CARBAJAL, Mr. CARSON, Ms. CASTOR of Florida, Ms. CLARKE of New York, Mrs. DIN- GELL, Mr. FOSTER, Mr. GALLEGO, Mr. HIGGINS of New York, Ms. WATERS, Mr. LARSON of Connecticut, Mr. LIEU, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. MEEKS, Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin, Ms. NORTON, Mr. PALLONE, Mr. PAYNE, Mr. POCAN, Mr. RASKIN, Mr. SMITH of Washington, Mr. TAKANO, Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi, Mr. TONKO, Mr. VARGAS, Ms. VELA´ZQUEZ, Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN, Ms. WILSON of Florida, Mr. ALLRED, Mr. AUCHINCLOSS, Ms. BALINT, Mr. BERA, Mr. BEYER, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Ms. BLUNT ROCHESTER, Mr. BOWMAN, Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania, Ms. BROWN, Ms. BROWNLEY, Ms. BUDZINSKI, Ms. BUSH, Ms. CARAVEO, Mr. CA´RDENAS, Mr. CARTER of Louisiana, Mr. CASAR, Mr. CASE, Mr. CASTEN, Mrs. CHERFILUS- MCCORMICK, Mr. CLEAVER, Mr. COHEN, Mr. CONNOLLY, Mr. CORREA, Mr. COSTA, Mr. COURTNEY, Ms. CRAIG, Ms. CROCKETT, Mr. CROW, Mr. CUELLAR, Ms. DAVIDS of Kansas, Mr. DAVIS of Illinois, Mr. DAVIS of North Carolina, Ms. DEAN of Pennsylvania, Ms. DEGETTE, Ms. DELAURO, Ms. DELBENE, Mr. DELUZIO, Mr. DESAULNIER, Mr. DOG- GETT, Ms. ESCOBAR, Ms. ESHOO, Mr. ESPAILLAT, Mr. EVANS, Mrs. FLETCHER, Mrs. FOUSHEE, Ms. LOIS FRANKEL of Florida, Mr. FROST, Mr. GARAMENDI, Mr. ROBERT GARCIA of California, Ms. GARCIA of Texas, Mr. GARCI´A of Illinois, Mr. GOLDEN of Maine, Mr. GOLDMAN of New York, Mr. GOMEZ, Mr. VICENTE GONZALEZ of Texas, Mr. GOTTHEIMER, Mrs. HAYES, Ms. HOULAHAN, Mr. HOYER, Ms. HOYLE of Oregon, Mr. IVEY, Mr. JACKSON of North Carolina, Mr. JACKSON of Illi- nois, Ms. JACOBS, Ms. JAYAPAL, Ms. KAMLAGER-DOVE, Ms. KAPTUR, VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:31 Sep 28, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6652 E:\BILLS\H14.IH H14 pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB 2 •HR 14 IH Mr. KEATING, Ms. KELLY of Illinois, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. KILMER, Mr. KIM of New Jersey, Ms. KUSTER, Mr. LANDSMAN, Ms. LEE of Pennsylvania, Ms. LEE of Nevada, Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ, Mr. LEVIN, Ms. LOFGREN, Mr. LYNCH, Mr. MAGAZINER, Ms. MANNING, Mrs. MCBATH, Ms. MCCLELLAN, Ms. MCCOLLUM, Mr. MCGARVEY, Mr. MENENDEZ, Ms. MENG, Mr. MFUME, Mr. MOSKOWITZ, Mr. MRVAN, Mr. MULLIN, Mr. HARDER of California, Mr. HUFFMAN, Mr. KHANNA, Mr. KRISHNAMOORTHI, Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Mr. NEAL, Mr. NEGUSE, Mr. NICKEL, Mr. NORCROSS, Ms. OMAR, Mr. PANETTA, Mr. PAPPAS, Mr. PASCRELL, Ms. PELOSI, Mrs. PELTOLA, Ms. PEREZ, Mr. PETERS, Ms. PETTERSEN, Mr. PHILLIPS, Ms. PINGREE, Ms. PLASKETT, Ms. PORTER, Ms. PRESSLEY, Mr. QUIGLEY, Mrs. RAMIREZ, Ms. ROSS, Mr. RUPPERS- BERGER, Mr. RYAN, Mr. SABLAN, Ms. SALINAS, Ms. SA´NCHEZ, Mr. SAR- BANES, Ms. SCANLON, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. SCHIFF, Mr. SCHNEIDER, Ms. SCHOLTEN, Ms. SCHRIER, Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia, Mr. SHER- MAN, Ms. SHERRILL, Ms. SLOTKIN, Mr. SORENSEN, Mr. SOTO, Ms. SPANBERGER, Ms. STANSBURY, Mr. STANTON, Ms. STEVENS, Ms. STRICKLAND, Mr. SWALWELL, Mrs. SYKES, Mr. THOMPSON of California, Ms. TITUS, Ms. TLAIB, Ms. TOKUDA, Mrs. TORRES of California, Mr. TORRES of New York, Mrs. TRAHAN, Mr. TRONE, Ms. UNDERWOOD, Mr. VASQUEZ, Ms. WEXTON, Ms. WILD, Mr. HIMES, Ms. MATSUI, Mr. MOULTON, Mr. RUIZ, Mr. THANEDAR, and Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ) intro- duced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Ju- diciary A BILL To amend the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to revise the criteria for determining which States and political sub- divisions are subject to section 4 of the Act, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- 1 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 2 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 3 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘John R. Lewis Voting 4 Rights Advancement Act of 2023’’. 5 VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:31 Sep 28, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H14.IH H14 pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB 3 •HR 14 IH SEC. 2. VOTE DILUTION, DENIAL, AND ABRIDGMENT 1 CLAIMS. 2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 2(a) of the Voting Rights 3 Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. 10301(a)) is amended— 4 (1) by inserting after ‘‘applied by any State or 5 political subdivision’’ the following: ‘‘for the purpose 6 of, or’’; and 7 (2) by striking ‘‘as provided in subsection (b)’’ 8 and inserting ‘‘as provided in subsection (b), (c), (d), 9 or (f)’’. 10 (b) VOTE DILUTION.—Section 2(b) of such Act (52 11 U.S.C. 10301(b)) is amended— 12 (1) by inserting after ‘‘A violation of subsection 13 (a)’’ the following: ‘‘for vote dilution’’; 14 (2) by inserting after the period at the end the 15 following: ‘‘For the purposes of this subsection:’’; 16 (3) by adding at the end the following new 17 paragraphs: 18 ‘‘(1) To prevail in demonstrating that a rep- 19 resentational, districting, or apportionment scheme 20 results in vote dilution, a plaintiff shall, as a thresh- 21 old matter, establish that— 22 ‘‘(A) the members of the protected class 23 are sufficiently numerous and geographically 24 compact to constitute a majority in a single- 25 member district; 26 VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:31 Sep 28, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H14.IH H14 pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB 4 •HR 14 IH ‘‘(B) the members of the protected class 1 are politically cohesive; and 2 ‘‘(C) the residents of that district who are 3 not the members of the protected class usually 4 vote sufficiently as a bloc to enable them to de- 5 feat the preferred candidates of the members of 6 the protected class. 7 ‘‘(2) Upon a plaintiff establishing the required 8 threshold showing under paragraph (1), a court shall 9 conduct a totality of the circumstances analysis with 10 respect to a claim of vote dilution to determine 11 whether there was a violation of subsection (a), 12 which shall include the following factors: 13 ‘‘(A) The extent of any history of official 14 voting discrimination in the State or political 15 subdivision that affected the right of members 16 of the protected class to register, to vote, or 17 otherwise to participate in the political process. 18 ‘‘(B) The extent to which voting in the 19 elections of the State or political subdivision is 20 racially polarized. 21 ‘‘(C) The extent to which the State or po- 22 litical subdivision has used voting practices or 23 procedures that tend to enhance the oppor- 24 tunity for discrimination against the members 25 VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:31 Sep 28, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H14.IH H14 pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB 5 •HR 14 IH of the protected class, such as unusually large 1 election districts, majority vote requirements, 2 anti-single shot provisions, or other qualifica- 3 tions, prerequisites, standards, practices, or 4 procedures that may enhance the opportunity 5 for discrimination against the members of the 6 protected class. 7 ‘‘(D) If there is a candidate slating proc- 8 ess, whether the members of the protected class 9 have been denied access to that process. 10 ‘‘(E) The extent to which members of the 11 protected class in the State or political subdivi- 12 sion bear the effects of discrimination, both 13 public or private, in such areas as education, 14 employment, health, housing, and transpor- 15 tation, which hinder their ability to participate 16 effectively in the political process. 17 ‘‘(F) Whether political campaigns have 18 been characterized by overt or subtle racial ap- 19 peals. 20 ‘‘(G) The extent to which members of the 21 protected class have been elected to public office 22 in the jurisdiction. 23 ‘‘(3) In conducting a totality of the cir- 24 cumstances analysis under paragraph (2), a court 25 VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:31 Sep 28, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H14.IH H14 pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB 6 •HR 14 IH may consider such other factors as the court may 1 determine to be relevant, including— 2 ‘‘(A) whether there is a significant lack of 3 responsiveness on the part of elected officials to 4 the particularized needs of the members of the 5 protected class, including a lack of concern for 6 or responsiveness to the requests and proposals 7 of the members of the protected class, except 8 that compliance with a court order may not be 9 considered evidence of responsiveness on the 10 part of the jurisdiction; and 11 ‘‘(B) whether the policy underlying the 12 State or political subdivision’s use of such vot- 13 ing qualification, prerequisite to voting, or 14 standard, practice or procedure is tenuous. 15 In making this determination, a court shall consider 16 whether the qualification, prerequisite, standard, 17 practice, or procedure in question was designed to 18 advance and materially advances a valid and sub- 19 stantiated State interest. 20 ‘‘(4) A class of citizens protected by subsection 21 (a) may include a cohesive coalition of members of 22 different racial or language minority groups.’’; and 23 (4) VOTE DENIAL OR ABRIDGEMENT.—Section 24 2 of such Act (52 U.S.C. 10301), as amended by 25 VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:31 Sep 28, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H14.IH H14 pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB 7 •HR 14 IH subsections (a) and (b), is further amended by add- 1 ing at the end the following: 2 ‘‘(c)(1) A violation of subsection (a) resulting in vote 3 denial or abridgment is established if the challenged quali- 4 fication, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure— 5 ‘‘(A) results or will result in members of a pro- 6 tected class facing greater costs or burdens in par- 7 ticipating in the political process than other voters; 8 and 9 ‘‘(B) the greater costs or burdens are, at least 10 in part, caused by or linked to social and historical 11 conditions that have produced or produce on the 12 date of such challenge discrimination against mem- 13 bers of the protected class. 14 In determining the existence of a burden for pur- 15 poses of subparagraph (A), the absolute number or 16 the percent of voters affected or the presence of vot- 17 ers who are not members of a protected class in the 18 affected area shall not be dispositive, and the af- 19 fected area may be smaller than the jurisdiction to 20 which the qualification, prerequisite, standard, prac- 21 tice, or procedure applies. 22 ‘‘(2) The challenged qualification, prerequisite, stand- 23 ard, practice, or procedure need only be a but-for cause 24 VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:31 Sep 28, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H14.IH H14 pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB 8 •HR 14 IH of the discriminatory result described in paragraph (1) or 1 perpetuate a pre-existing burdens or costs. 2 ‘‘(3)(A) The factors that are relevant to a totality of 3 the circumstances analysis with respect to a claim of vote 4 denial or abridgement pursuant to this subsection include 5 the following: 6 ‘‘(i) The extent of any history of official voting- 7 related discrimination in the State or political sub- 8 division that affected the right of members of the 9 protected class to register, to vote, or otherwise to 10 participate in the political process. 11 ‘‘(ii) The extent to which voting in the elections 12 of the State or political subdivision is racially polar- 13 ized. 14 ‘‘(iii) The extent to which the State or political 15 subdivision has used photographic voter identifica- 16 tion requirements, documentary proof of citizenship 17 requirements, documentary proof of residence re- 18 quirements, or other voting practices or procedures, 19 beyond those required by Federal law, that impair 20 the ability of members of the minority group to par- 21 ticipate fully in the political process. 22 ‘‘(iv) The extent to which minority group mem- 23 bers bear the effects of discrimination, both public 24 or private, in areas such as education, employment, 25 VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:31 Sep 28, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H14.IH H14 pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB 9 •HR 14 IH health, housing, and transportation, which hinder 1 their ability to participate effectively in the political 2 process. 3 ‘‘(v) The use of overt or subtle racial appeals ei- 4 ther in political campaigns or surrounding adoption 5 or maintenance of the challenged practice. 6 ‘‘(vi) The extent to which members of the mi- 7 nority group have been elected to public office in the 8 jurisdiction, provided that the fact that the minority 9 group is too small to elect candidates of its choice 10 shall not defeat a claim of vote denial or abridgment. 11 ‘‘(vii) Whether there is a lack of responsiveness 12 on the part of elected officials to the particularized 13 needs of minority group members, including a lack 14 of concern for or responsiveness to the requests and 15 proposals of the group, except that compliance with 16 a court order may not be considered evidence of re- 17 sponsiveness on the part of the jurisdiction. 18 ‘‘(viii) Whether the policy underlying the State 19 or political subdivision’s use of the challenged quali- 20 fication, prerequisite, standard, practice, or proce- 21 dure is tenuous. In making a determination under 22 this clause, a court shall consider whether the quali- 23 fication, prerequisite, standard, practice, or proce- 24 dure in question was designed to advance and mate- 25 VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:31 Sep 28, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H14.IH H14 pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB 10 •HR 14 IH rially advances a valid and substantiated State inter- 1 est. 2 ‘‘(ix) Subject to paragraph (4), such other fac- 3 tors as the court may determine to be relevant. 4 ‘‘(B) The factors described in subparagraph (A), indi- 5 vidually and collectively, shall be considered as a means 6 of establishing that a voting practice amplifies the effects 7 of past or present discrimination in violation in subsection 8 (a). 9 ‘‘(C) A plaintiff need not show any particular com- 10 bination or number of factors to establish a violation of 11 subsection (a). 12 ‘‘(4) The factors that are relevant to a totality of the 13 circumstances analysis with respect to a claim of vote de- 14 nial or abridgement do not include the following: 15 ‘‘(A) The degree to which the challenged quali- 16 [Text truncated for display. Full text available on Congress.gov.]

Important: This plain English summary was generated by AI and is provided for informational purposes only. It is not legal advice. Always consult the official bill text on Congress.gov or a qualified attorney for legal matters.