On June 22, the U.S. Supreme Court released its opinion in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v Holder, 08-322. The issue had appeared to be whether Section 5 of the federal Voting Rights Act is constitutional. Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act requires certain states, and also parts of certain other states, to get permission from the Voting Rights Section of the U.S. Justice Department before changing election laws or practices.

However, a subsidiary issue lurking in the case was whether a small part of a covered state was entitled to “opt out” of coverage. The Act has always permitted states to “opt out” (or, “bail out”). Most observers had read the Act to mean that a small utility district in a covered state, like the plaintiff in this case, is not free to use opt out.

To opt out, a state or a portion of a state must show that it has not been the subject of a complaint about its voting rights practices during the past 10 years.

The Court ruled that small parts of a state are free to try to use the “bail-out” procedure if they wish. Therefore, there was no need for the Court to simultaneously make a decision about whether Section 5 is constitutional. The vote was 8-1. Justice Clarence Thomas would have struck down Section 5. Here is the opinion, thanks to ElectionLawBlog.