The Voting Rights Act Should Protect Voting—Not Perpetuate Fear

By Dr. Eric M. Wallace

The Voting Rights Act Should Protect Voting—Not Perpetuate Fear
For more than half a century, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) has stood as one of the most significant civil rights laws in American history. Its original purpose was noble, necessary, and urgent: to dismantle state-sponsored barriers that prevented Black Americans—especially in the South—from exercising their constitutional right to vote.

But not every provision of the Act was intended to be permanent. And today, some of those temporary provisions have been transformed into political weapons—used not to protect voting rights, but to frighten Black voters into believing that their freedom to vote hangs by a thread.

That fear narrative is false.

What the Voting Rights Act Actually Requires Reauthorization
Only certain sections of the Voting Rights Act ever required periodic reauthorization. These sections were designed as extraordinary, temporary remedies to address exceptional circumstances—namely, systemic, state-enforced racial disenfranchisement.

Among them:

• Section 5, which required certain states and localities—primarily in the South—to obtain federal “preclearance” before making changes to voting laws or procedures.
• Sections 4(f)(4) and 203 mandate that some jurisdictions provide voting materials in languages other than English.
• Sections 6 through 9 allow the federal government to send voting registrars and election observers into covered jurisdictions.

These provisions were not permanent constitutional fixtures. They were emergency measures, imposed under the assumption that the targeted jurisdictions could not be trusted to administer elections fairly on their own.

The key word is were.

What Has Changed—and Why It Matters

America has changed profoundly since 1965.

Black voter registration and turnout in the South now rival—and often exceed—that of other regions. Black elected officials serve at every level of government in states once accused of systematic exclusion. Federal law already prohibits racial discrimination in voting nationwide, with robust enforcement mechanisms still firmly in place.

Yet the reauthorization debate continues to be framed as if Jim Crow were waiting just outside the door.

It is not.

The continued enforcement of Section 5 and its companion provisions presumes that certain states remain uniquely racist and incapable of self-governance. That presumption is not only outdated—it is corrosive. It freezes history in amber and insists that progress never counts.

The Fear Narrative—and Who Benefits From It

Whenever reform or sunset of these provisions is discussed, familiar voices emerge to warn Black Americans that their right to vote is “under attack.” These claims are amplified by what I describe in my book as the race-baiting grievance industry—a coalition of activists, politicians, and organizations that profit from keeping racial fear alive.

The message is simple: without these federal restraints, the segregated South will rise again.

But this narrative depends on a troubling assumption—that Black Americans remain politically helpless without permanent federal guardianship. That idea is not empowering. It is patronizing.

And it is wrong.

Temporary Laws Should Not Become Permanent Shackles

The framers of the Voting Rights Act understood that emergency powers must be temporary. To make them permanent is to suggest that reconciliation, repentance, and reform are impossible—that certain regions of the country are forever guilty and forever suspect.

That is not justice. It is political theology masquerading as civil rights.

Ending or reforming these provisions does not eliminate protections against discrimination. It simply restores equal constitutional footing among the states and affirms that the era of legalized disenfranchisement has ended.

It Is Time to Tell the Truth

Black Americans do not need to be scared into voting. We do not need to be told that our citizenship is fragile or conditional. And we do not need archaic laws repurposed to sustain a narrative of perpetual White supremacy when the evidence no longer supports it.
The Voting Rights Act should remain what it was always meant to be: a shield against real injustice—not a tool for political manipulation.

It is time to retire provisions that have outlived their purpose and put to rest the myth that the segregated South is waiting to return.

History should be remembered—but it should not be weaponized.

Dr. Eric M. Wallace, author of the new book, The Heart of Apostasy: How The Black Church Abandoned Biblical Authority for Political Ideology--And How to Reclaim It,  is a trailblazing scholar, dynamic speaker, and passionate advocate for faith-based conservatism. With a distinguished academic background and an unwavering commitment to biblical truth, Wallace has become a leading voice challenging cultural and political narratives that conflict with a biblical worldview.

Wallace holds postgraduate degrees in biblical studies (M.A., ThM, Ph.D.), Wallace is the first African American to earn a Ph.D. in biblical studies from Union-PSCE (now Union Presbyterian Seminary). His scholarship and ministry experience equip him to address today’s most pressing sociopolitical issues through the lens of faith, reason, and historical accuracy.