(TriceEdneyWire.com) – One of the most confusing, recurring Internet stories is the admonishment to protect the expiring 1965 Voting Rights Act. The last time that happened was in 2006 when the VRA was extended by Congress to 2031. When the law was extended, most African Americans breathed a sigh of relief and put concern for the law on the shelf - at least for 25 years!

Enter Shelby County, Alabama! Shelby is exercising its privilege to challenge the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act - at least Section 5 of the law. On Feb. 27, the Supreme Court will hear a challenge to the constitutionality of Section 5 which requires pre-clearance from the federal government before states can take action that might dilute the Black vote. If found constitutional, Section 5 would not be questioned again and remain in effect until 2031.

Section 5 was originally put into place in states that historically and specifically had laws hindering the Black vote. These were the states that had the insidious reputation for a test or device restricting the opportunity to register and vote. States currently under Section 5 include Alabama, Alaska, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Georgia. Notoriously, African American voters in these (and other) states were prevented from registering to vote or voting based upon race-based obstruction. Examples of questions asked of African Americans in Alabama included: naming all sixty-seven county judges in the state, naming the date on which Oklahoma was admitted to the Union, and declaring how many bubbles are in a bar of soap. There were, of course, exceptions for whites preventing their requirement to test.

State Senator Hank Sanders who represents Alabama's 23rd Senate District (Selma) believes that Section 5 has been called into question because of President Barack Obama’s political success. If Section 5 is declared unconstitutional, states would have the power to dilute the Black vote through redistricting. As illustrated by the recent redistricting efforts of Republican legislators in Virginia, if Section 5 is declared unconstitutional, the repercussions of such a decision would be regressive and more widespread than in those few states where it’s now enforced.

Let's be clear. The Republican message has proven incapable of garnering sufficient support to win a race at the national level. I don't know if their indignity is piqued by losing the Presidency to the same Democrat twice or whether they seem irrationally incensed because that Democrat is African American. Whatever the reason, before and after the November 2012 Election, Republicans have shown their inclination and willingness to subvert the intent and spirit of the Constitution to gain a political advantage.

We’ve seen the overt efforts of the Republican Ohio Secretary of State to disenfranchise African American voters with the disparate application of voting laws and the orchestration of the reduction of early voting opportunities. We witnessed the Republican governor of Florida unsuccessfully engage in voter obstruction efforts designed to have the effect of reducing the impact and number of African American and Hispanic voters. We viewed the televised statement of the Pennsylvania Republican Party Chair when he declared that the voter identification law passed in that state would guarantee a Romney victory in PA. And a few short days ago, we were informed that the Republican run Virginia Senate used political trickery to gerrymander a new pro-Republican district in their state. There is no question about the Republican assault against our vote.

The immediate question that most readers of this column will ask is, "What can I do?" The Supreme Court will hear the case for Section 5 on February 27, 2013. I am asking that you show your concern by joining us in front of the Supreme Court at 10:00AM that day to demonstrate (to the Justices) the significance of their decision.

(Dr. E. Faye Williams is Chair of the National Congress of Black Women, www.nationalcongressbw.org. 202/678-6788)

Editor's Note: "The State of Equality and Justice in America" is a 20-part series of columns written by an all-star list of contributors to commemorate the 50th Anniversary of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

The contributors include: U. S. Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) LCCRUL 50th Anniversary Grand Marshal; Ms. Barbara Arnwine, President and Executive Director, Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (LCCRUL); Mr. Charles Ogletree, Professor, Harvard University Law School/Director, Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice; the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson Sr., President/CEO, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition; the Rev. Joseph Lowery, Co-founder, Southern Christian Leadership Conference; U. S. Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.); and 14 additional thought leaders and national advocates for equal justice.

Here's the Sixth op-ed of the series:

The State of Equality and Justice in America:
'Let Us Not Lose Focus on the Justice Issues That Still Loom'

 By Dr. Elsie L. Scott

This year, we are celebrating the 150^th Anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation and the 50^th Anniversary of the March on Washington. As African-Americans, we are pleased that this country has progressed from the forced enslavement of our race to the removal of the Jim Crow laws and practices.

We are also celebrating the reelection of a man of African descent to a second term as President of the United States. There is a lot to celebrate in 2013, but there is still much work ahead.

One area that is seriously flawed and that requires the attention of more than the progressive movement is the "justice system". It is commonly known that the U.S. incarcerates more of its citizens than any other industrialized country. The fact that a disproportionate number of the persons arrested, convicted and imprisoned are African-Americans is troubling.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), in 2010, 4,347 out of every 100,000 Black males were incarcerated in a state, federal or local facility. This number is seven times higher than the number of White males incarcerated.

In 2010, African-Americans, at 13.1 percent of the U. S. population, made up 38 percent of the total state prison population. Hispanic-Americans, at 16.7 percent of the U. S. population, made up 21 percent of the state prison population. Compare those statistics to White Americans, at 78.1 percent of the U. S. population, made up only 34 percent of the total state prison population.

When arrest data are compared to prison data, the percentage of Blacks in the total arrest numbers (27.8 percent) is found to be 10 percent lower than the percentage incarcerated. This seems to indicate that Blacks are more likely to be convicted and sentenced to time in prison than Whites. Similarly, an examination of felony conviction data shows that Black felony convictions are more likely to result in incarceration than White felony convictions. According to BJS data for 2006, 39 percent of persons convicted on felonies were Black and 60 percent were White.

Conviction data show that Whites who are convicted are less likely to be incarcerated (66 percent to 72 percent Blacks). For drug offenses, 72 percent of Blacks convicted were incarcerated in 2006 compared to 61 percent of whites. Only 59 percent of Whites convicted of drug trafficking were incarcerated compared to 70 percent of Blacks. The mean maximum sentence imposed by state courts on White felons was 37 months compared to 42 months for Black felons. If violent offenses are isolated, the statistics show that the mean maximum prison sentence given to whites was 99 months, but the mean for Blacks was 108 months.

Why are such large numbers of Blacks in prison? To answer that question one needs to drill down into the issue of race, arrests and convictions. Almost any Black man can tell a story of being stopped by the police under questionable circumstances. Regarding convictions, look at the fact that DNA testing has exonerated over 300 persons and 70 percent of the exonerations have been people of color.

As long as many see the image of crime as a Black man, this country will struggle with addressing race in the criminal justice system. Young Black boys will continue to be placed in the prison pipeline, beginning with childish pranks until society returns school discipline to the school system. Prisons will continue to be full of Black men until investments are made in removing the barriers that are contributing to school dropouts because two-thirds of school dropouts end up in the criminal justice system.

In recent years, there has been a reduction in the number of persons incarcerated. Now, action must be taken to address the problems faced by persons released from prison. Laws and ordinances that prevent ex-inmates from securing housing and employment are impediments to them becoming productive citizens. Their paths to restoration must begin with reinstating their civil rights, especially their right to vote.

So as we celebrate the freedom and equality anniversaries, let us not lose focus on the justice issues that still loom before us.

Dr. Elsie L. Scott, founding director of the Ronald W. Walters Center at Howard University, is immediate past president/CEO of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation. This article - the sixth of a 20-part series - is written in commemoration of the 50^th Anniversary of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. The Lawyers' Committee is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization, formed in 1963 at the request of President John F. Kennedy to enlist the private bar's leadership and resources in combating racial discrimination and the resulting inequality of opportunity - work that continues to be vital today. For more information, please visit www.lawyerscommittee.org.

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - I was among the 33.5 million people who sat riveted to their televisions, parsing every second of the State of the Union Address.  I was stunned to learn, through a Washington Post article by Lisa De Moraes, that viewership was less substantial for this address than last year’s 38 million, and even lower than the 48 million that watched in 2010.  Are people less interested in what our President has to say?  Or is there something else going on?

In any case, from my perspective this was an important and significant SOTU address.  Unleashed from the pressure of re-election, and able to set forth a progressive and aggressive agenda, President Obama dealt with some of the key issues that face our nation.  He was able to utter the word “poverty” without his tongue freezing up.  Unfortunately, he is unable to utter the words “Black” or “African American”. Still, President Obama laid out an agenda that will ultimately have a positive effect on the African American community, especially if some of his efforts are targeted.

In 1967, Dr. Martin Luther King said, "The curse of poverty has no justification in our age.  It is socially as cruel and blind as the practice of cannibalism at the dawn of civilization, when men ate each other because they had not yet learned to take from soil or to consume the abundant animal life around them. The time has come for us to civilize ourselves by the total, direct and immediate abolition of poverty."

President Obama was not so direct, nor so cutting.  But he offered important clarity to an issue his administration has ignored heretofore.  While focusing on the middle class, he also noted that people should not work full time and still earn a wage that puts them beneath the poverty line.  His advocacy for a minimum wage of $9 per hour, or about $18,000 a year for a single worker who might support a family was a significant move forward for the poor.  Missing – a conversation about poor people and health benefits, and about the employers who refuse to employ people full time so that they can avoid paying benefits. Obamacare will cover many of these employees, but the fact that profitable companies would rather offer a worker 22 hours than 30 to save money is reprehensible.

The State of the Union address is not an opportunity to drill down on every issue, so I very much understand that President Obama could not offer details to the many proposals he raised in SOTU.  Still, it was refreshing to hear the President talk about poverty, about women’s work and wages, and about issues of equality. The first legislation that President Obama signed was the Lily Ledbetter Act, which dealt with equal pay issues.  Without acknowledging race in any of these conversations, the fact is African-American women (and Latinas) are at the bottom of the pay scale.  Advocating equal pay and dealing with issues of poverty, and implementing solutions, improves the material conditions of women at the bottom.

President Obama discussed infrastructure improvements in his 2008 campaign. Partisan bickering has made it difficult for him to work with states to refurbish, as he says, 70,000 bridges, as well as roads and highways. The last time our nation paid attention to these structural issues was in the 1950s when President Eisenhower, in a job-creation move, built federal highways around our nation to facilitate easy transportation. Have you driven on an interstate highway lately?  Whether you are Democrat or Republican, we should all agree that these highways (some called pot hole central) need improvement?  Some politicians are so willing to undermine the Obama administration that they are also willing to see our nation become dysfunctional.

The two emotional high points in this speech included the shout out to the 102-year-old woman who waited all day to vote, and the call to gun reform, mentioning victims by name.  I was most moved by the family of Hadiya Pendleton, who sat with First Lady Michelle Obama, who attended their daughter’s funeral.  They are not only important as parents of a gun violence victim, but as proxies for the more than 500 people shot in Chicago in the last year or so.  It was also moving to see former Congresswoman Gabby Gifford, unable to clap, who brought her hands together.  The President’s comments got a standing O, but as soon as the President’s speech was over, thirsty vultures (like Senator Rubio) ran to the media to voice opposition.

Julianne Malveaux is a Washington, DC based economist and author.

Rosa Parks PHOTO: National Gallery of Portraits

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from the Afro American Newspaper