Biden remembers bloody 1965 Selma march

The footage of civil rights demonstrators being beaten by Alabama state troopers on Selma's Edmund Pettus Bridge in 1965 had a profound effect on his political consciousness and the conscience of the nation, Vice President Joe Biden said on Sunday.

"What we saw was entrenched hostility and prejudice coming face to face with undaunted courage and resolve," Biden said.

The vice president traveled to Selma to take part in a Bridge Crossing Jubilee to commemorate the American "Bloody Sunday" in 1965, which was credited with impelling Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act and thus enfranchise millions of African Americans in the South.

"As a senior in college in another part of the country, I remember most of us thought that [the right to vote] was secured. Most of us thought that the hatred, the viciousness, the bigotry, that we've seen in our own states had at least subsided," Biden said.

The beatings on the bridge, Biden explained, became an inflection point in the national debate about the voting rights, illustrating that universal suffrage remained far from a guarantee.

"I have one regret," Biden said. "It took me 48 years to get here. I should have been here."

"Thank god we had you," he added.

While those who marched successfully pushed voting rights to the forefront of the national conversation, Biden said that even today, work must continue against those who would abridge those rights.

• Supreme Court divided on Voting Rights Act
• Biden on gun safety: No more excuses

"What became known as 'Bloody Sunday' not only steeled the resolve of America's civil rights leaders, it compelled our national policymakers to take action," said Attorney General Eric Holder, also in attendance.

The result - the Voting Rights Act - provided "tools that remain not only effective, but essential, even today," he said.

"Let me be very clear: Although our nation has indeed changed, although the South is far different now, and although progress has indeed been made, we are not yet at the point where the most vital part of the Voting Rights Act, section 5, can be deemed unnecessary," Holder said. "The struggle for voting rights for all Americans does and must continue, and it will."

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments earlier this week on a challenge to the Voting Rights Act. Some have raised concerns that the high court could roll back some of the safeguards contained in the landmark legislation.

[sandy 1027]

Congress reauthorized the Voting Rights Act during the Bush( II) administration.After hearing of some of the questions/ arguments of some of the Justices, one should be disturbed.Maintaining the protection of the right to vote for people of color isn't " the perpetuation of a 'racial entitlement'", as Justice Scalia posits, but the upholding of a fundamental RIGHT of American citizens.The idea that this would actually be open to debate, and that the court could possibly strike down the mechanism that protects this right, is absurd.[Shelby County , Ala. ,in particular, which brought this suit, has itself been a repeat- violator of this act, which adds to the absurdity, because it proves why section 5 SHOULD NOT beoverturned ].There is already in place a means for offenders to "bail out" if they have not had any violations within 10 years; and many have done just that.That seems fair.Some may see it as unfair for these states or cities to have continual scrutiny, year after year by the Justice Dept., when others don't.However,just as a previously unfaithful husband has broken the trust of his wife ( or vice-a-versa), and is not fully trusted ( nor should be), the offending parties warrant this oversight .


Mr. Scalia also seemed to endorse "judicial activism" with odd remarks that in essence said that Congress will make the wrong decision and vote to uphold this "racial entitlement", so the Supreme Court should take matters into its hands and legislate from the bench on this issue.It was all a window into the thinking of someone who seems to be advancing an ideologically- based agenda.Very troubling.After the 2012 voter suppression efforts, we don't need less scrutiny.We need more.

[ammo17]

me and my brother were in navy in 1965 at this time we had no idea what was going on in the usa,all news was not forwarded to the military.

[Alliance-For-Justice]

The Voting Rights Act has indeed led to profound changes - in fact it's been an inspiration to human rights leaders around the world. That's why 22 champions of human rights worldwide, including South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu, have signed a letter to the Court urging the justices to uphold the law. Details on our website here: http://www.afj.org/press/02252013.html

But these leaders, and their American counterparts know there still is a long way to go. Indeed, the evidence that the Voting Rights Act still is needed is overwhelming. We've summarized some of that evidence on our website here: http://www.afj.org/connect-with-the-issues/voting-rights-act.html

We also have complete analysis of last week's oral arguments, including excerpts from the audio of those arguments here: http://afjjusticewatch.blogspot.com/search/label/VRAanalysis

Alliance for Justice
Washington DC, www.afj.org

[GOP-R--Con-Men]

Republicans conspired and vowed to make Barack Obama a one term president. They followed up that vow with unyielding, unrelenting, sabotaging obstruction to stop every proposal President Obama and Democrats put forth to help ordinary Americans and revive the economy. They use HOSTAGE POLITICS with manufactured crisis after crisis to extract political ransom from President Obama and Democrats. Republicans have shown time after time they don't give a damn about country, constitution or Americans.

Demented teabaggers are more than happy to destroy America carrying the water for their fellow bedsheet and pillow case wearing republicans.

[Jefsr]

Hey Biden.......Obama's campaign co-manager / Mayor Julian Castro and San Antonio TX City attorney Bernard (brother of White House Social Secretary Jeremy Bernard) banned two law-abiding whistleblowers from City Hall and public meetings for reporting / investigating public/police corruption.

Two Federal Civil Rights lawsuits have been filed to challenge the Constitutional violations.

Why don't you come to SA and lead a march for Civil Rights?

Jim Harrington - Texas Civil Rights Project of Austin TX - "This is one of the most bizarre First Amendment cases I've seen in my 40 year legal career."

Texas Public Radio / KSTX is covering the scandal and helping to expose the ongoing criminal conspiracy.


http://tpr.org/post/banned-city-hall

[RogerClegg]

Here's why Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is bad policy, outdated, unconstitutional, and ought to be struck down by the Supreme Court: http://www.pacificlegal.org/opeds/Overturn-unconstitutional-Voting-Rights-Act and
http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/341443/two-points-ishelby-county-v-holderi-roger-clegg

What's especially ironic is that the principal use to which Section 5 is put today is forcing jurisdictions to create and maintain racially segregated and gerrymandered voting districts - which is completely at odds with the original ideals of the Civil Rights Movement.

There are other federal laws available to protect the rights of voters, and they don't raise the problems that Section 5 does.

[rzarc2]

It might have been outdated if the southern Democrats had died off, but they have only been replaced by GOPer's not only in the South but in many parts of the country who fundamentally do not believe people not white should have a right to vote. If anything the protections afforded by the act should be expanded to many other states.

Signed: A 60 year old white guy.

[GOP-R--Con-Men]

AMEM!

RZARC2

[zebra62]

Easy for you to say!