A now-irrelevant provision of the Voting Rights Act may soon be no more.

The Supreme Court has just agreed to take on the case of Fisher v. University of Texas. Abigail Fisher, a white woman, argues that she has been a victim of the university's race-conscious admission policies; the university contends that its drive for racial and ethnic diversity is educationally enriching -- a benefit to all students.

In 2011, does black political inclusion really still depend on protecting black candidates from white competition in race-based districts?

Most Americans are appalled not only by the notion of unequal enforcement of voter-intimidation cases, but by the whole politically correct edifice of affirmative action and racial preferences that has been constructed over the years.

In offering superheated rhetoric rather than logical analysis, Andrew McCarthy's take on the New Black Panther Party incident exemplifies the hysteria that sets in when racially complicated issues are involved.

The attorney general's interpretation of the Voting Rights Act and proposed guidelines to ensure that certain states obtain federal approval for all proposed changes in voting procedure including "redrawing districting maps" will negatively affect the landscape of American politics for decades to come.

Tim Scott's victory over Paul Thurmond in the GOP primary in South Carolina's First Congressional District is welcome reinforcement that American race relations have changed since the days of Thurmond's father, staunch segregationist advocate Strom Thurmond.

Forty-five years after the passage of the Voting Rights Act, the Justice Department has adopted a definition of discriminatory intent that strengthens the federal hand in micromanaging districting in states and counties throughout the United States and increases the odds that the Supreme Court will soon cast a skeptical eye on Section 5.