California Voting Rights Act

California Voting Rights Act
California State Legislature
Full name	California Voting Rights Act of 2001
Acronym	CVRA
Introduced	February 23, 2001
Signed into law	July 9, 2002
Sponsor(s)	Sen. Richard Polanco
Governor	Gray Davis
Code	Elections Code
Section	CA Elec Code §§ 14025-14032
Bill	S.B. 976
Status: Current legislation

The California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (CVRA) is a state law in the state of California. It makes it easier for minority groups in California to prove that their votes are being diluted in "at-large" elections by expanding on the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965.^[1] In Thornburg v. Gingles (1986), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that there are certain conditions that must be met in order to prove that minorities are being disenfranchised: that the affected minority group is sufficiently large to elect a representative of its choice, that the minority group is politically cohesive, and that white majority voters vote sufficiently as a bloc to usually defeat the minority group's preferred candidates; the CVRA eliminated one of these requirements. Unlike the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which is a federal law, the CVRA does not require plaintiffs to demonstrate a specific geographic district where a minority is concentrated enough to establish a majority. Certain cities that have never had minority representation or have a history of minority candidate suppression can be liable for triple damages and be forced to make changes within 90 days. That makes it easier for minority voters to sue local governments and eliminate at-large elections.^[2] The Act was eventually signed into law on 9 July 2002.^[1]

In 2006, California's Fifth District Court of Appeal ruled the act constitutional in Sanchez v. City of Modesto.^[3] The city claimed that the act was unconstitutional because it inherently favored people of color. The court concluded that the act was not racist in nature and returned the case to the trial court.^[3]

Critics of the act argue that it inappropriately makes race a predominant factor in elections and that it does not make sense to eliminate the requirement to establish a geographic district in which there is a minority concentration.^[2] Advocates argue that at-large elections allow bloc voting, which effectively keeps minorities out of office.^[4]