The Tampa Bay Times has this interesting PolitiFact analysis of Stephen Nodine’s chances of getting on the Republican primary ballot, in the upcoming special election to fill the vacant U.S. House seat in Alabama’s First District. Nodine is a Republican who has been elected to city and county office in Mobile County. He is serving a two-year term in prison, and he wants to run in the special election as a Republican. The party’s state chair says Nodine can’t meet the party’s qualifications.

On June 21, a Washington state court ordered the Washington State Campaign Finance Commission not to take legal action against a committee that backed a recall, at least for the time being. The recall committee had been the beneficiary of pro bono legal assistance, when it sued the state over donation limits to recall committees. Even though the recall committee won that federal case in U.S. District Court, the Commission now argues that the free legal assistance to the committee was an illegal campaign contribution. The state court recent order tells the Commission to cease its enforcement, at least until the 9th circuit weighs in on the general issue of whether contributions to recall committees can be limited. See this story.

On June 25, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Shelby County, Alabama v Holder that section four of the federal Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional. Section four is the coverage formula for determining which jurisdictions must get permission before changing any voting law or practice. If Congress does nothing, then section five can’t be enforced either. Section five says that covered jurisdictions must get approval from the Justice Department before changing election laws and practices. The vote was 5-4. The decision is by Chief Justice John Roberts.

The dissent is by Justice Ruth Ginsburg. The dissent, at pages 24-28, has considerable detail about Alabama, and why that state’s past and recent record of voting rights behavior justifies continued existence of the entire federal Voting Rights Act.

Since it is not likely that Congress will re-write section four, the practical impact of today’s decision will be to increase the number of lawsuits. Section two of the act has not been limited in any way. It gives the U.S. Justice Department authority to sue any state or other jurisdiction that has an election law or practice that results in racial discrimination in voting. The number of such lawsuits will probably increase, because the new laws and practices that lead to such lawsuits will increase without the pre-clearance law in effect.