The law requires a number of US states, mostly in the South, to receive federal approval for election changes.
The Voting Rights Act was extended for 25 years by Congress in 2006 with broad support.
‘Congress did not use the record it compiled to shape a coverage formula grounded in current conditions,’ Chief Justice John Robertswrote in the court’s opinion.
‘It instead re-enacted a formula based on 40-year-old facts having no logical relationship to the
present day.’
The justices did not go as far as to strike down section 5 of the law, known as the pre-clearance provision, which requires certain states to get federal approval before making election-law changes. But since section 4, which sets the test for pre-clearance, has been found unconstitutional, the ruling renders section 5 invalid until a new formula can be passed by Congress.
Shelby County in Alabama launched the legal challenge. It argued that the pre-clearance process was out of date and an over-reach of federal power.
But supporters of the provision said recent efforts to change election laws in some parts of the US, including a series of voter identification laws, underlined why the measure was still
relevant.