The America that we knew in 1965 was a much different America than the one we know today This was the basic belief of the five United States Supreme Court Justices who sided with the majority when the court struck down key provisions of the historic Voting Rights Act this past Tuesday. As Chief Justice John Roberts said when explaining the ruling, "our country has changed for the better." If Roberts' assessment of our nation is correct, then one can't help but ask, does America still need the Voting Rights Act, or has the law essentially become outdated? When the historic civil rights legislation was signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965, poll taxes, literacy tests, and grandfather clauses were the norm. As a result of these practices, thousands of minority voters were disenfranchised all throughout the south. The Voting Rights Act sought to change all that, and did by requiring federal oversight of voter registration in certain southern states if discrimination was presumed. That was then. Many in support of overturning the law would argue that the forms of discrimination that prevented minorities from exercising their right to vote in 1965 are no longer in existence, and if the law was designed to help eliminate those discriminatory practices, then the law served its purpose, and is no longer needed. Those who support keeping all sections of the law intact would say that in eliminating federal oversight of the electoral process in the south, the court is opening the door for continued discrimination of minority voters, just in different ways. This decision now enables a handful of southern states to set their own election laws without having to gain approval from the federal government first. Many legal experts have suggested that because of the decision by the court, many states in the south will implement stricter voter ID laws which could possibly suppress voter turnout among minorities. It has also been suggested that Tuesday's ruling could lead to gerrymandering or the redrawing of congressional districts for the sole purpose of hurting minority voters. I for one, applaud the progress we have made as a country since 1965 on this issue. None of us should rest until all forms of discrimination in voting are eliminated. Tuesday's ruling by the United States Supreme Court leaves me with mixed feelings. On one hand, I can understand and appreciate the argument that we are a changed nation, and certain provisions of this law are no longer needed. On the other hand, if the elimination of certain sections of the law open up the possibility of discrimination occurring once again, I would have a hard time believing that the Supreme Court made the right decision.