Editing Civil Rights Act (section)

=====Bailout=====
Under Section 4(a), a covered jurisdiction may seek exemption from coverage through a process called "bailout."<ref name=DOJsection4 /> To achieve an exemption, a covered jurisdiction must obtain a declaratory judgment from a three-judge panel of the District Court for D.C. that the jurisdiction is eligible to bail out.<ref name=DOJsection5 /><ref name=DOJsection4 /> As originally enacted, a covered jurisdiction was eligible to bail out if it had not used a test or device with a discriminatory purpose or effect during the 5 years preceding its bailout request.<ref name=RevisedBailout />{{rp|22, 33–34}} Therefore, a jurisdiction that requested to bail out in 1967 would have needed to prove that it had not misused a test or device since at least 1962. Until 1970, this effectively required a covered jurisdiction to prove that it had not misused a test or device since before the Act was enacted five years earlier in 1965,<ref name=RevisedBailout />{{rp|6}} making it impossible for many covered jurisdictions to bail out.<ref name=RevisedBailout />{{rp|27}} However, Section 4(a) also prohibited covered jurisdictions from using tests or devices in any manner, discriminatory or otherwise; hence, under the original act, a covered jurisdiction would become eligible for bailout in 1970 by simply complying with this requirement. But in the course of amending the Act in 1970 and 1975 to extend the special provisions, Congress also extended the period of time that a covered jurisdiction must not have misused a test or device to 10 years and then to 17 years, respectively.<ref name=RevisedBailout />{{rp|7, 9}} These extensions continued the effect of requiring jurisdictions to prove that they had not misused a test or device since before the Act's enactment in 1965.

In 1982, Congress amended Section 4(a) to make bailout easier to achieve in two ways. First, Congress provided that if a state is covered, local governments in that state may bail out even if the state is ineligible to bail out.<ref name=DOJsection4 /> Second, Congress liberalized the eligibility criteria by replacing the 17-year requirement with a new standard, allowing a covered jurisdiction to bail out by proving that in the 10 years preceding its bailout request:
# The jurisdiction did not use a test or device with a discriminatory purpose or effect;
# No court determined that the jurisdiction denied or abridged the right to vote based on racial or language minority status;
# The jurisdiction complied with the preclearance requirement;
# The federal government did not assign federal examiners to the jurisdiction;
# The jurisdiction abolished discriminatory election practices; and
# The jurisdiction took affirmative steps to eliminate voter intimidation and expand voting opportunities for protected minorities.
Additionally, Congress required jurisdictions seeking bailout to produce evidence of minority registration and voting rates, including how these rates have changed over time and in comparison to the registration and voting rates of the majority. If the court determines that the covered jurisdiction is eligible for bailout, it will enter a declaratory judgment in the jurisdiction's favor. The court will retain jurisdiction for the following 10 years and may order the jurisdiction back into coverage if the jurisdiction subsequently engages in voting discrimination.<ref name=RevisedBailout /><ref name=DOJsection4 /><ref name=CRS />{{rp|22–23}}<ref name="VRA-4(a)">Voting Rights Act of 1965 § 4(a); {{uscsub|52|10303|a|1|F}} (formerly 42 U.S.C. § 1973b(a)(1)(F))</ref>

The 1982 amendment to the bailout eligibility standard went into effect on August 5, 1984.<ref name=DOJsection4 /> Between that date and 2013, 196 jurisdictions bailed out of coverage through 38 bailout actions; in each instance, the attorney general consented to the bailout request.<ref name=DOJbrief />{{rp|54}} Between that date and 2009, all jurisdictions that bailed out were located in Virginia.<ref name=DOJsection4 /> In 2009, a municipal utility jurisdiction in Texas bailed out after the Supreme Court's opinion in ''[[Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder]]'' (2009),<ref name=NW>''[[Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder]]'', {{ussc|557|193|2009|source=f}}</ref> which held that local governments that do not register voters have the ability to bail out.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/us/23scotus.html |title=Justices Let Stand a Central Provision of Voting Rights Act |last=Liptak |first=Adam |date=June 23, 2009 |work=The New York Times |access-date=June 22, 2009}}</ref> After this ruling, jurisdictions succeeded in at least 20 bailout actions before the Supreme Court held in ''Shelby County v. Holder'' (2013) that the coverage formula was unconstitutional.<ref name=DOJbrief />{{rp|54}}

Separate provisions allow a covered jurisdiction that has been certified to receive federal observers to bail out of its certification alone. Under Section 13, the attorney general may terminate the certification of a jurisdiction if 1) more than 50 percent of the jurisdiction's minority voting age population is registered to vote, and 2) there is no longer reasonable cause to believe that residents may experience voting discrimination. Alternatively, the District Court for D.C. may order the certification terminated.<ref name=Observers />{{rp|237, 239}}<ref name=DOJobservers />