September, 15 2016, 03:00pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Email:,press@civilrights.org,Phone: (202) 869-0398
Civil and Human Rights Coalition Urges Self-Proclaimed VRA Restoration Supporter Speaker Ryan to Bring Bill up for Vote
WASHINGTON
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights coalition of more than 200 national civil rights groups is urging Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, a self-proclaimed supporter of restoring the Voting Rights Act, to bring a VRA restoration up for a vote on the House Floor.
In a letter sent to his office this week, The Leadership Conference asked Speaker Ryan "to bring legislation to the House floor this month to restore the critical protections of the VRA. As we approach the first presidential election in 50 years without that law's full protections, our request for immediate action is more urgent than ever."
The organization is looking to appeal to the Speaker, who has claimed to support a VRA restoration, because the chairman of the committee of jurisdiction, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, "has shut down the possibility of any action in the Judiciary Committee while he remains in charge, and it is now clear that there is no way forward through him. Chairman Goodlatte's intractability does a disservice to the millions of voters impacted by the fallout from the Shelby County decision."
"Lip service is not public service," said Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference. "While court after court after court acknowledges widespread voting discrimination, Speaker Ryan has not lifted one finger to ensure our election isn't rigged from politicians choosing who can vote based on the color of their skin."
The full letter is below and linked here.
September 13, 2016
The Honorable Paul Ryan, Speaker
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Speaker Ryan,
On the heels of the 51st anniversary of the Voting Rights Act (VRA or the Act), we remain deeply troubled that there has been no action in the House of Representatives to address the issue of voting rights. We are writing to urge you to bring legislation to the House floor this month to restore the critical protections of the VRA. As we approach the first presidential election in 50 years without that law's full protections, our request for immediate action is more urgent than ever.
As you know, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 protected the voting rights of racial and ethnic minorities in several states and local jurisdictions with a history of discrimination against communities of color in voting. These jurisdictions were covered by Section 5 of the Act, which required the Department of Justice (DOJ) to approve any changes to voting in specific states and localities. However, in 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court's devastating decision in Shelby County v. Holder invalidated the pre-clearance requirement and the DOJ's authority to send observers to covered jurisdictions. Following Shelby, numerous states have passed voting laws, which several federal courts agree have a disparate impact on people of color and language minorities. In the case of North Carolina, the courts found that the state's massive bundle of voting restrictions, passed within weeks of the Shelby decision, targeted African-Americans "with almost surgical precision."[1] Evidence shows that restrictive voter laws also suppress turnout of the elderly,[2] people with disabilities,[3] and students.[4]
And while some courts have taken action to block discriminatory laws in states like North Carolina and Texas, these decisions came only after years of costly litigation during which impacted citizens were blocked from voting in the 2014 elections and this year's primaries. Meanwhile, there is no way of knowing how many potentially discriminatory voting changes are being made by cities, counties, school boards, water boards, and other local jurisdictions that were previously required to be precleared. According to "Democracy Diminished,"[5] a report by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., "more than 85% of preclearance work previously done under Section 5 was at the local level."
Since Congress has failed to pass a bill to restore the VRA, which has resulted in DOJ lacking authority over voting changes in places that Congress determined in 2006 should continue to have federal oversight, we are extremely concerned that there will be widespread voter discrimination in the upcoming presidential election. This is exacerbated by the fact that there will be no DOJ observers holding jurisdictions accountable. In the 2012 general election, the Department of Justice sent 780 federal observers to 51 jurisdictions in 23 states.[6] Because of the Shelby decision, there will be virtually no election observers deployed in 2016.[7]
Shortly before the last VRA was reauthorized in 2006, former Congressman and HUD Secretary Jack Kemp wrote an op-ed,[8] "Renew the Voting Rights Act," urging Congress to reauthorize all sections of the law that were set to expire. Secretary Kemp's op-ed was prescient. He wrote that, "If Section 5 is not extended, the covered jurisdictions will not have to submit voting changes to the Department of Justice. The loss of federal authority to control voting procedures could enable local governments to more easily discriminate against minority voters. Renewing the Voting Rights Act won't solve all of these problems, but more Americans will have confidence that their votes really do count."
Mr. Speaker, you followed Secretary Kemp's guidance and voted to reauthorize the law, as did an overwhelming number of your colleagues. Your support for the bill overall helped protect "the crown jewel of American liberties" - a phrase President Ronald Reagan used to refer to the right to vote[9] when he reaffirmed his commitment to the 1982 VRA reauthorization.
In February of this year, you recognized the importance of the VRA when you told the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) that you support Rep. James Sensenbrenner's bill, the Voting Rights Amendment Act (H.R. 885), to help restore the VRA. While we realize that, as Speaker, you would prefer to defer to the Committee chair, in this case, not insisting that legislation to restore the VRA be brought to the floor is likely to result in disenfranchisement for thousands of Americans. This is because, for the past three years, Chairman Goodlatte has refused to consider any such legislation, claiming that it is not needed despite being provided by us and others with many examples of voter discrimination and intimidation. We understand your commitment to a bottom-up approach in Congress, but protecting the right to vote is too important to be held hostage by a single committee chair.
We are well aware of your various efforts to honor civil rights - from supporting H.R. 885 and visiting Selma with Rep. John Lewis to honoring the Bloody Sunday foot solders by presenting them with the Congressional Gold Medal. In contrast to your record of understanding and supporting the need to protect the right to vote, Chairman Goodlatte has shut down the possibility of any action in the Judiciary Committee while he remains in charge, and it is now clear that there is no way forward through him. Chairman Goodlatte's intractability does a disservice to the millions of voters impacted by the fallout from the Shelby County decision.
We know this because we wrote to Chairman Goodlatte in July,[10] presenting him with ample evidence of why he should hold a hearing and advance legislation to restore valuable protections against voting discrimination. To date, the chairman has taken no action whatsoever.
With the election less than 60 days away, we urge you to follow through on your commitment to ensure the right to vote for all eligible Americans without delay. Real leadership is making sure all American voters have access to the ballot box. It is time to take this matter to the floor of the House of Representatives immediately. We know you believe in voting rights and the VRA. Now you need to demonstrate your commitment.
Sincerely,
Wade Henderson, President & CEO
Nancy Zirkin, Executive Vice President
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights is a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 200 national organizations to promote and protect the civil and human rights of all persons in the United States. Through advocacy and outreach to targeted constituencies, The Leadership Conference works toward the goal of a more open and just society - an America as good as its ideals.
(202) 466-3311LATEST NEWS
Experts Pillory Trump Case for War on Iran: 'Flimsiest Excuse for Initiating a Major Attack' in Decades
"What they posed as the threat they were trying to preempt—an attack by Iran against US forces—is so extremely implausible, it is also laughable," said one analyst.
Mar 01, 2026
Senior Trump administration officials attempted during a briefing with reporters on Saturday to make their case for the joint US-Israeli military assault on Iran that has so far killed hundreds and plunged the Middle East into chaos.
According to experts who listened to the briefing, which was conducted on background, the justification for war was incredibly weak. Daryl Kimball, president of the Arms Control Association, told Laura Rozen of the Diplomatic newsletter that the administration's argument was "the flimsiest excuse for initiating a major attack on another country without congressional authorization, in violation of the UN Charter, in many decades."
During his early Saturday remarks announcing the attacks, President Donald Trump claimed that "imminent threats from the Iranian regime" against "the American people" drove him to act. But Kimball said that administration officials "provided absolutely no evidence" to back that assertion during the briefing.
"What they posed as the threat they were trying to preempt—an attack by Iran against US forces—is so extremely implausible, it is also laughable," said Kimball.
Following the start of Saturday's assault, which Trump explicitly characterized as a war aimed at overthrowing the Iranian government, unnamed administration officials began leaking the claim that Trump feared an Iranian attack on the massive US military buildup in the Middle East, prompting him to greenlight the bombing campaign in coordination with Israel and with a nudge from Saudi Arabia.
Kimball, in a social media post, took members of the US media to task for echoing the administration's narrative. "Reporters need to do more than stenography," he wrote in response to Punchbowl's Jake Sherman.
"The American people were lied to about Iraq. The American people are being lied to again today—and once again, it is ordinary people who will pay the price."
Trump and top administration officials also repeated the longstanding claim from US warhawks that Iran is bent on developing a nuclear weapon, something Iranian leaders have publicly denied—including during recent diplomatic talks. Neither US intelligence assessments nor international nuclear watchdogs have produced evidence indicating that Iran is moving rapidly in the direction of nukes, as claimed by the administration.
Rozen noted that some remarks from administration officials during Saturday's briefing "suggested Trump’s negotiators"—a team that included Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff—"may not have had the expertise or experience to understand the Iranian proposal to curb its nuclear program." Rozen reported that one administration official kept misstating the acronym for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog.
Trump administration officials, according to Rozen, seemed astonished that Iranian negotiators would not accept the US offer to provide free nuclear fuel "forever" for Iran's peaceful energy development, viewing the rejection as a suspicious indication that Iran was opposed to a diplomatic resolution—even though, according to Oman's foreign minister, Iran had already made concessions that went well beyond the terms of the 2015 nuclear accord that Trump abandoned during his first stint in the White House.
Experts said it should be obvious—particularly given Trump's decision to ditch the previous nuclear accord—why Iran would not trust the US to stick by such a commitment.
The administration's inability to provide a coherent justification for war tracks with the rapidly shifting narrative preceding Saturday's strikes—an indication, according to some observers, that Trump had made the decision to attack Iran even in the face of diplomatic progress and left officials to try to cobble together a rationale after the fact.
In a lengthy social media post, Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth insisted war was necessary because Iran "refused to make a deal" and because the Iranian government "has targeted and killed Americans," hardly the claim of an imminent threat push by the president and other administration officials.
Brian Finucane, a senior adviser to the US Program at the International Crisis Group, noted in response that the Trump administration has "sidelined anyone who could articulate... a coherent argument, partly because expertise is deep state and woke and partly because they just don't care."
The result is another potentially catastrophic war that runs roughshod over US and international law, puts countless civilians at risk, and threatens to spark a region-wide conflict.
"President Trump, along with his right-wing extremist Israeli ally Benjamin Netanyahu, has begun an illegal, premeditated, and unconstitutional war," US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement on Saturday. "Tragically, Trump is gambling with American lives and treasure to fulfill Netanyahu's decades-long ambition of dragging the United States into armed conflict with Iran."
"The American people were lied to about Vietnam. The American people were lied to about Iraq," Sanders added. "The American people are being lied to again today—and once again, it is ordinary people who will pay the price."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Democratic Leaders Face Backlash Over 'Cowardly' Responses to Trump War on Iran
"As we plunge headlong into another catastrophic war, Sen. Schumer and Rep. Jeffries’ throat-clearing and process critique only serves Trump and the war machine."
Mar 01, 2026
The top Democrats in the US Congress, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, faced backlash on Saturday over what critics described as tepid, equivocal responses to President Donald Trump's illegal assault on Iran—and for slowwalking efforts to prevent the war before the bombing began.
While both Democratic leaders chided Trump for failing to seek congressional authorization and not adequately briefing lawmakers on the details of Saturday's attacks, neither offered a full-throated condemnation of a military assault that has killed hundreds so far, including dozens of children, and hurled the Middle East into chaos.
Schumer (D-NY)—who infamously worked to defeat the 2015 nuclear deal that Trump later abandoned during his first White House term, setting the stage for the current crisis—said he "implored" US Secretary of State Marco Rubio to "be straight with Congress and the American people about the objectives of these strikes and what comes next."
"Iran must never be allowed to attain a nuclear weapon," he added, "but the American people do not want another endless and costly war in the Middle East when there are so many problems at home."
Jeffries (D-NY), a beneficiary of AIPAC campaign cash, said in his response to the massive US-Israeli assault that "Iran is a bad actor and must be aggressively confronted for its human rights violations, nuclear ambitions, support of terrorism, and the threat it poses to our allies like Israel and Jordan in the region."
"The Trump administration must explain itself to the American people and Congress immediately, provide an ironclad justification for this act of war, clearly define the national security objective, and articulate a plan to avoid another costly, prolonged military quagmire in the Middle East," said Jeffries.
The Democratic leaders' responses bolstered the view that their objections to Trump's attack on Iran are based on procedure, not opposition to war.
This is a disgusting and cowardly statement handwringing about process and the need for a briefing.
No you idiot. This war is a horror and a disaster and must be directly opposed. Any Democrat who can’t say that needs to resign and ESPECIALLY the ones in leadership. https://t.co/CdZoEyNkOy
— Krystal Ball (@krystalball) February 28, 2026
Claire Valdez, a New York state assemblymember who is running for Congress, said that "as we plunge headlong into another catastrophic war, Sen. Schumer and Rep. Jeffries’ throat-clearing and process critique only serves Trump and the war machine."
"Democrats should speak clearly and with one voice: no war," Valdez added.
Schumer and Jeffries both committed to swiftly forcing votes on War Powers resolutions in their respective chambers. But reporting last week by Aída Chávez of Capital & Empire indicated that top Democrats worked behind the scenes to slow momentum behind the resolutions, helping ensure they did not come to a vote before Trump launched the war.
"The preferred outcome of many AIPAC-aligned Senate Democrats, according to a senior foreign policy aide to Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, is that Trump acts unilaterally, weakening Iran while absorbing the domestic backlash ahead of the midterms," Chávez wrote.
Neither Schumer nor Jeffries backed legislation last year aimed at forestalling US military intervention in Iran.
The top Democrats' responses to Saturday's US-Israeli attacks on Iran, which Trump said would continue "uninterrupted" even after the killing of the nation's supreme leader, contrasted sharply with statements of rank-and-file congressional Democrats—and even some members of leadership—who condemned the president for shredding the Constitution and driving the US into another deadly war that the American public opposes.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who has been floated as a possible 2028 challenger to Schumer, said Saturday that "the American people are once again dragged into a war they did not want by a president who does not care about the long-term consequences of his actions."
"This war is unlawful. It is unnecessary. And it will be catastrophic," said Ocasio-Cortez. "This is a deliberate choice of aggression when diplomacy and security were within reach. Stop lying to the American people. Violence begets violence. We learned this lesson in Iraq. We learned this lesson in Afghanistan. And we are about to learn it again in Iran. Bombs have yet to create enduring democracies in the region, and this will be no different."
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), a vice chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, was more blunt.
"Congress must stop the bloodshed by immediately reconvening to exert its war powers and stop this deranged president," she said. "But let’s be clear: Warmongering politicians from both parties support this illegal war, and it will take a mass anti-war movement to stop it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Says Bombing of Iran to Continue 'Uninterrupted' After Reported Killing of Supreme Leader
"For Iranians already suffering under repression, sanctions, and economic hardship, this escalation will mean only more pain," said the president of the National Iranian American Council.
Feb 28, 2026
US President Donald Trump and Israeli officials claimed Iran's supreme leader, 86-year-old Ali Khamenei, was killed in an airstrike on Saturday, along with other senior Iranian figures.
The US and Israeli militaries targeted Khamenei and other Iranian leaders with their opening barrage of strikes, part of an operation that was reportedly planned for months—with the launch date decided weeks ago—even as Trump claimed to be open to a diplomatic off-ramp. NPR, citing an anonymous source, reported that an Israeli strike killed Khamenei.
Trump made clear that Khamenei's alleged killing, which the Iranian government has not confirmed, would not stop the deadly military onslaught, which the US president launched in coordination with Israel without authorization from Congress and in clear violation of international law. The US president said explicitly in remarks early Saturday that his goal was to topple the Iranian government—something that analysts stressed is not synonymous with assassinating the supreme leader.
In a Truth Social post, Trump wrote that "heavy and pinpoint bombing... will continue, uninterrupted throughout the week or, as long as necessary to achieve our objective of PEACE THROUGHOUT THE MIDDLE EAST AND, INDEED, THE WORLD!"
Iran has responded to the US and Israeli assault with drone and missile attacks on Israel and American military bases across the Middle East. The US Central Command said in a statement that there have not yet been any reports of American casualties and that "damage to US installations was minimal."
In Iran, more than 200 people have been killed by US-Israeli airstrikes and around 700 others injured, according to the Iranian Red Crescent, a toll that's sure to grow in the coming days as rescue workers search through rubble. More than 80 people—mostly young children—were killed in an Israeli strike on a school in southern Iran.
Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council, said in a statement that "for Iranians already suffering under repression, sanctions, and economic hardship, this escalation will mean only more pain."
“Bombing Tehran will not bring security. It will endanger civilians, place US service members at risk, empower the most repressive and violent elements inside Iran, and destabilize the region for years to come," said Abdi. "Congress must act immediately to reassert its constitutional authority and halt further escalation. The pending War Powers resolutions must come to a vote without delay. Lawmakers must make clear that there is no authorization for war with Iran."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


