Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/12pdf/12-96_6k47.pdf
Page Number: 59.0

28 

SHELBY COUNTY v. HOLDER 

GINSBURG, J., dissenting 

cordings  represent  compelling  evidence  that  political
exclusion  through  racism  remains  a  real  and  enduring
problem” in Alabama.  Id., at 1347.  Racist sentiments, the 
judge  observed,  “remain  regrettably  entrenched  in  the 
high echelons of state government.”  Ibid. 

These  recent  episodes  forcefully  demonstrate  that  §5’s
preclearance  requirement  is  constitutional  as  applied  to 
Alabama  and  its  political  subdivisions.8   And  under  our 
case  law,  that  conclusion  should  suffice  to  resolve  this 
case.  See  United  States  v.  Raines,  362  U. S.  17,  24–25 
(1960) (“[I]f the complaint here called for an application of 
the  statute  clearly  constitutional  under  the  Fifteenth 
Amendment, that should have been an end to the question 
of  constitutionality.”).  See  also  Nevada  Dept.  of  Human 
Resources  v.  Hibbs,  538  U. S.  721,  743  (2003)  (SCALIA,  J., 
dissenting)  (where,  as  here,  a  state  or  local  government 
raises a facial challenge to a federal statute on the ground
that  it  exceeds  Congress’  enforcement  powers  under  the 
Civil War Amendments, the challenge fails if the opposing
party is able to show that the statute “could constitution­
ally be applied to some jurisdictions”).

This  Court  has  consistently  rejected  constitutional 
challenges  to  legislation  enacted  pursuant  to  Congress’ 
enforcement  powers  under  the  Civil  War  Amendments
upon  finding  that  the  legislation  was  constitutional  as
applied  to  the  particular  set  of  circumstances  before  the 
Court.  See  United  States  v.  Georgia,  546  U. S.  151,  159 
(2006)  (Title  II  of  the  Americans  with  Disabilities  Act  of 
1990  (ADA)  validly  abrogates  state  sovereign  immunity
“insofar  as  [it]  creates  a  private  cause  of  action  . . .  for 
conduct  that  actually  violates  the  Fourteenth  Amend­

—————— 

8 Congress  continued  preclearance  over  Alabama,  including  Shelby
County, after considering evidence of current barriers there to minority 
voting  clout.    Shelby  County,  thus,  is  no  “redhead”  caught  up  in  an
arbitrary scheme.  See ante, at 22.