Rules to Enforce Voting Rights Due (New York Times)

    Poltce car eccortlng vehlcles

RUH$ EI{FORCE

IIOTII{G RIGIITS DUE

Minority Groups Obiect to

to Make Challenges Harder

By ROBERT PEAR,
SFdd b Tb Nc Yort Ttil

WASHINGTON, Aug. 3l - Tbe Rea-
gan Administratiqr has derreloped new
rules for eofordng the Vding Rights
Act thrt *urld inate it more dtfllcult
forr black and Hlspanlc people and
other miDtrlty grqryo to chaUerye
stste cnd locrl electlon laws as dls-
crtoinatory.

Thc rules deflne tlle srandads that
thc Jnstlce Dspertment nses tn decid-
tng rhcther to approve changes ln local
elccttfi laws atd procedures. Under
the law, certain states and canntl€s
wlth a history ol discrimlnation must
obtatn approval trom tlre d€partm€ot
or the Federal Dtstrict Cqrrt here b$
fore they Ftt into effect any change in
local electlon laws.

Iddrtor SG.; tbc BurdGo

The propced new nrles say that in
ccrtstn casec, tbe penpn or group op
pc&rg a change tn local electlqt law
rlu bear the hudem of provlng that tt
reaults ln dlscrlmlnatlon. Undef qrr-
r€nt rules, local offlcials must prove
that voting laws ar€ not dtscrtmina-
tory. In addltlqr, the new rules wqild
peflnlt changes that make mlnortty
gxoupo worse ofl il tle Jwttce Depart-
mcot concludes that $rch "retllgr
lslm" ls unavotdable.
I tttornef, General Edwtn Meese
tsald the nw nrles, whlch arc s€t to

Cmtlnucd m Page ll, C.olunn I



NewRulei io Enforce Voting A:ct
Would Mahe Challenge,s Harder

Gmtlnued Fnom Page I

E

:

lnto effect at the end of the year, were
needed to make the department,s
prdcedures conform with iourt Oeci-
slons and changes in the Vothg Rlghts

. Act made by Congress in 1982.
Howwer, the proposals have been

vigorously criticized by the League of
'Women Voters; the Mexican American
Legal Defense and Educatlonal Fund,
the lawyers Committee for Civil
Rigbts Under L-aw and others who say
the new nrles would weaken enforce,
pent of vdtru rights.

FraDk R. Parker, an attorney at the
Joint Center for Political Studies, a re
search institute that specializes in
issues affecting blacls, said that shift-
ing the btrrden of prof in voting rights
cases wonld be an "extraordinary
departure" from longstanding prac-
tice. For A) years, he noted, local offi-
cials have borne the burden of pmving
that a propoeed change was not dis-
criminatory. The neqr nrles, he said,
would ptace "the burden of prmf on the
victims of discrimination, rather than
on the perpetrators."

Justice Department officials said the
revised nrles would be published in the
Federal Register, probably in Novem-
ber, and would take effect il) dap
later.

Scqe ol Enlmemeot Nerrcwed
The nery rules woild narrow tlre way

tlrc law is enlerced as it aprplies to spe
cial electims to fill vacant offices and

redictricting plans prepared by local
in response to cdrrt orders.

The new rules say that changes or-
lred by a Federal @urt arc not sub

to the rcquirement that they be

'rwtth respect to th€ir effec.dve excr-
bise of the electoral francUrc." Gm-
mentiru qr tbe Jurdot Oepertnat
prq6al, Laughlln McDculd, dfuectc
of the Sqilhern rqfonsl offtce of the
Anerican Ciiil Llbertteg Unlm, sald:
"Thene is rrc urch thing as unavoddable
retrogr€ssion. The Attorney Goneral
can always avold it by obJectlng to a
dFcrtminstory change."

The new rules say the Attorlcy Geo,
eral will obJect to a r€dtrstrlctlng plan tl
it resulB in a "slgnificant rcductton o(
minority voting strcngth." LltoriEe,
they say, the Attorney G€oerel mlght
object to a city's annexation of srr-
rpundir8 territory if it cauc6 a "slgnll-
icant reductlon ln a Jurlsdlctlor's mt-
nority pry.rlatlqr perc€otag€."

Cyntlta D. Hlll, a lawyer wtth the
League of lVomen Voters, aald the Jus-
tice D€partmeot's use of the word "slg-
nificant" lmplies tXat "some rmdcffnell
degree of discdminadon ls neded be
fore a vottng dhange ts corrtdercd ob
jecticnble." In fact, she !ald, dllcrlE-
inatiql is "aboolutely prohlbltcd"
under the l,aw.

Cittng thts and other prqcals, she
said, "We have grave conceras tlat
several of the revisims would substan-
tiauy weakelr enforrement" ol tbe Vot-
ing Rights Act.

The new ruleo are not dtrectly re
lated to the voung rights case ln whictr
Senator Bob Dole, a l(ansas R€flrblt-
can, and nine otber members of Con.
gress flled a brief Friday oppostng th€
Reagan Administratlon. That case,
now belore the Stpreme C.rnrt, ln,
volves reapporilmment ol the North
Carolina Legislature. Blacks flled sutt
to block tbe state pl,an, which was ap
proved by the Jrrsttce DepBrtmeot tin
1982.

A Obrccdc M&l3 h ffa
From 106ti, when tbe Vodrg Rights

Act was adopted, tlnuuh tbe €od of
198{,85,14) ebctio law chengos were
submitted to tbe JBtice @artment
for rerriew, and tlre Attornei Goneral
objected to 1,074, accordlng to a dcpart-
ment spokesman. Itat year 10,,180
changes were subditted,,and the de
partment obJected to 71.

The rcquirem€ot that electlon law
changes be apprcved tn advance
applies to nine states: Alabana, Nas.
ka, Arizoru, Georgia, Lortstana, Ml;
sisstppi, Sa$h CarcUns, Texas md
Virgflnia.

r€d in advance in Washington. In a
:al such case involving ndistrict-
the corrt either directs local offi-
to adopt a new redistricting plan

ctpces a plan from among sevbral
rmitted by participants in the litica.

The Supremr
by participants in the litiga-
iupremr Corrt hes held thrthas held thtt

preclearance -requircment of the
Rights Act isg Rights Act is appUcable" in

cases when the redistrictlng plan
pre"ared

ng plan
and rers prepard by local officials anti re

)cts their "policy choices."
Jndith SandeE Castro of the Mexi-

American Legal Defense Fund
the propced nev rules would thus

;i "dangerous looplrcle" per:mit-
local gwernments to circumvent

e requlrement for advance cl@ranc.e
redistricting plans.
Undqrthe Voting Rights Act, local of-

ls seeking apprwal ol a new elec-
law must show that it "does n(ltlaw must show that it "does not
rthe purpce atd will not have.the
t" of discriEinstlngegtinst mem-
ol a mtnority group. The new rules

the Attorney Gneral may apprwe
oges tbat have an adverte effect on

App[cr to lils, Y.o(t

"rctrngressim" is "uiravoidable.,'
ol a'mtmrity group if the lg-ate pqtrlado" wbi& trlggrld

law's appllcadon to tbe aras.A cfugge is retrogressive, acco,rding
to tb SupreEe Cqrrt, il it makes meD-

It appltes to parts ol l0 dcr states,
including the borwghs of Manhattan,
Brooklpand the Brux. TheNerYott
borcughs were included becaucc thry
had a literacy test as a quallllcatlq0 im
voters in N&ember 168, 8il ln'&it
5rear's Preaideotlal el€cttc tb irrmrt
tbere was less thao 50 percat of the

-

Job hn*ra! Ch.ck ic&y'r tln* .:\:,bers of a uinoAty grurp wor3e .off

I

(

I
I
n
a

h
G
a
o
le

'x
tl
ti
R
tl
p
a
g
b

sl
8i
F
c
A
d

d
ti
!

0
1
c

I
C

s