Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/12pdf/12-96_6k47.pdf
Page Number: 38.0

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

7 

GINSBURG, J., dissenting 

Promise  and  Pitfalls  of  the  New  Voting  Rights  Act,  117
Yale  L. J.  174,  182–183  (2007)  (hereinafter  Persily).    The 
bill  was  read  and  debated  in  the  Senate,  where  it  passed 
by a vote of 98 to 0.  152 Cong. Rec. S8012 (July 20, 2006).
President  Bush  signed  it  a  week  later,  on  July  27,  2006, 
recognizing  the  need  for  “further  work  . . .  in  the  fight 
against  injustice,”  and  calling  the  reauthorization  “an
example of our continued commitment to a united America 
where every person is valued and treated with dignity and 
respect.”  152 Cong. Rec. S8781 (Aug. 3, 2006). 

In  the  long  course  of  the  legislative  process,  Congress
“amassed  a  sizable  record.”    Northwest  Austin  Municipal 
Util.  Dist.  No.  One  v.  Holder,  557  U. S.  193,  205  (2009).
See also 679 F. 3d 848, 865–873 (CADC 2012) (describing 
the  “extensive  record”  supporting  Congress’  determina­
tion that “serious and widespread intentional discrimination 
persisted in covered jurisdictions”).  The House and Senate 
Judiciary Committees held 21 hearings, heard from scores
of  witnesses,  received  a  number  of  investigative  reports
and other written documentation of continuing discrimina­
tion in covered jurisdictions.  In all, the legislative record
Congress  compiled 
filled  more  than  15,000  pages.
H. R.  Rep.  109–478,  at  5,  11–12; S. Rep.  109–295,  at  2–4,
15.  The  compilation  presents  countless  “examples  of  fla­
grant  racial  discrimination”  since  the  last  reauthoriza­
tion;  Congress  also  brought  to  light  systematic  evidence 
that  “intentional  racial  discrimination  in  voting  remains 
so  serious  and  widespread  in  covered  jurisdictions  that 
section 5 preclearance is still needed.”  679 F. 3d, at 866. 

After  considering  the  full  legislative  record,  Congress
made the following findings: The VRA has directly caused
significant  progress  in  eliminating  first-generation  barri­
ers to ballot access, leading to a marked increase in minor­
ity  voter  registration  and  turnout  and  the  number  of 
minority  elected  officials.  2006  Reauthorization  §2(b)(1).
But  despite  this  progress,  “second  generation  barriers