S. 1659: Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2015

114th Congress · introduced 2015-06-24 · Government Operations and Politics · Latest: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S4604-4606)

federal

Follow this bill, step by step

Where it came from: introduced 2015-06-24 · official record
Who proposed it: Sen. Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT] · what a sponsor is
What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
Where it stands now: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S4604-4606) Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.

What does this mean?

Official title

Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2015

Plain summary

Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2015 This bill amends the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to allow a representative official of an Indian tribe, with authorization from the governing body of the tribe, to request one or more polling places to be located on tribal lands. The state or political subdivision shall provide each requested polling place at no expense to the Indian tribe if certain criteria are met. A federal court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce constitutional voting guarantees, but also certain violations of the Act as well as of any federal prohibition against discrimination on the basis of race, color, or membership in a language minority group, for an appropriate period to prevent commencement of new devices to deny or abridge the right to vote. Requirements are revised for determining which states and political subdivisions are or are not covered by criteria for declaratory judgments that they have not used devices to deny or abridge the right to vote. Any state (and all of its political subdivisions) shall be subject to such requirements for a 10-year period if: 15 or more voting rights violations occurred there during the previous 25 years; or 10 or more violations occurred during the previous 25 years, at least one of which was committed by the state itself (as opposed to a political subdivision within it). Any specific political subdivision of a state shall also be subject to those requirements for a 10-year period if 3 or more violations occurred in it during the previous 25 calendar years. A state or political subdivision that obtains a declaratory judgment that it has not used a device to deny or abridge the right to vote shall be exempt from such requirements unless new violations occur after the declaratory judgment was issued. Each state and each political subdivision shall: (1) identify any newly enacted or adopted law, regulation, or policy that includes a voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or a voting-related standard, practice, or procedure (covered practice); and (2) ensure that no such covered practice is implemented unless or until the state or political subdivision complies with certain preclearance requirements. This bill prescribes transparency requirements, including reasonable public notice, regarding any changes to: (1) voting prerequisites, standards, or procedures; (2) polling place resources; or (3) demographics and electoral districts. Department of Justice authority to assign observers receives new extensions, including authority to assign observers to enforce bilingual election requirements. Courts shall grant preliminary injunctive relief if a complainant raises a serious question whether the challenged covered practice violates the Act or the Constitution and, on balance, the hardship imposed upon the defendant by the relief will be less than the hardship on the plaintiff if the relief were not granted.

Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.

What a vote does

A “Yea” vote

If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.

A “Nay” vote

If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.

PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).

What does this mean? (plain words)

Official text

Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2015

Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate)

AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text

No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.

Limited to a few requests an hour per person.

The strongest published arguments

Arguments for (supporters)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Arguments against (opponents)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Alternatives

Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes

Officials and money

Sponsor: Sen. Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT] · 45 cosponsors

Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.

Cosponsors on this site

Richard J. Durbin (D-IL), Christopher A. Coons (D-DE), Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Mark R. Warner (D-VA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Cory A. Booker (D-NJ), Bernard Sanders (I-VT), Kirsten E. Gillibrand (D-NY), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Gary C. Peters (D-MI), Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI), Jack Reed (D-RI), Michael F. Bennet (D-CO), Edward J. Markey (D-MA), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Christopher Murphy (D-CT), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Angus S. King, Jr. (I-ME)

No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.

Words on this page, explained (6)

Appropriation: Money a legislature sets aside by law for a specific purpose. Government agencies may spend public money only as it has been appropriated.
Authorization: A law that creates or continues a government program and says what it may do, often with a suggested spending ceiling. An authorization alone does not provide money; a separate appropriation does.
Bill: A proposed law. It becomes law only if it passes the legislature and is signed by the president or governor (or a veto is overridden).
Exemption: A rule that removes certain people, property or activities from a tax or requirement.
Jurisdiction: The area or the matters a government or court has authority over.
Rulemaking: The process agencies use to write regulations that carry out laws passed by Congress or a legislature. Usually an agency publishes a proposed rule, takes public comments, then publishes a final rule.

Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.

Sources

Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate)
Congress.gov
Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-114s1659.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/114/s>

Record fed-us-cong114-s1659 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong114 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong114