Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/12pdf/12-96_6k47.pdf
Page Number: 50.0

Cite as:  570 U. S. ____ (2013) 

19 

GINSBURG, J., dissenting 

were the only metrics capable of justifying reauthorization 
of the VRA.  Ibid. 

B 

I turn next to the evidence on which Congress based its 
decision  to  reauthorize  the  coverage  formula  in  §4(b).
Because  Congress  did  not  alter  the  coverage  formula,  the 
same  jurisdictions  previously  subject  to  preclearance
continue to be covered by this remedy.  The evidence just 
described, of preclearance’s continuing efficacy in blocking 
constitutional violations in the covered jurisdictions, itself
grounded Congress’ conclusion that the remedy should be
retained for those jurisdictions.

There  is  no  question,  moreover,  that  the  covered  juris­
dictions  have  a  unique  history  of  problems  with  racial
discrimination in voting.  Ante, at 12–13.  Consideration of 
this  long  history,  still  in  living  memory,  was  altogether
appropriate.   The  Court  criticizes  Congress  for  failing  to
recognize that “history did not end in 1965.”  Ante, at 20. 
But  the  Court  ignores  that  “what’s  past  is  prologue.”    W. 
Shakespeare, The Tempest, act 2, sc. 1.  And “[t]hose who
cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”  1 
G.  Santayana,  The  Life  of  Reason  284  (1905).    Congress
was  especially  mindful  of  the  need  to  reinforce  the  gains
already made and to prevent backsliding.  2006 Reauthor­
ization §2(b)(9).

Of particular importance, even after 40 years and thou­
sands  of  discriminatory  changes  blocked  by  preclearance,
conditions  in  the  covered  jurisdictions  demonstrated  that
the formula was still justified by “current needs.”  North-
west Austin, 557 U. S., at 203. 

Congress  learned  of  these  conditions  through  a  report,
known as the Katz study, that looked at §2 suits between 
1982 and 2004.  To Examine the Impact and Effectiveness
of  the  Voting  Rights  Act:  Hearing  before  the  Subcommit­
tee  on  the  Constitution  of  the  House  Committee  on  the