Yesterday at the end of its term, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case Moore v. Harper, which involves a deceptively simple question that could have huge implications for voting rights and redistricting in the United States: What exactly is meant by the word “Legislature” in the “Elections Clause” and the “Pres­id­en­tial Elect­ors Clause” of the U.S. Constitution?

The Supreme Court claimed there was insufficient evidence of a racial gap in voter registration and turnout to justify upholding Section 4 of the VRA and allowing Section 5 of the Act to remain effective. Nine years later, we now have sufficient evidence.

Voters understand that political polarization threatens our country. This is what we can do about it.

The Voting Rights Act is intrinsically linked to the events surrounding Bloody Sunday, what preceded them, and what we as a nation should have learned from them. As time passes and as the efforts to repair the Act do not, we risk losing the lessons of Selma and the statutory activation of the 15th Amendment.

At a time when our own democratic system is struggling, the U.S. was a glaring outlier among the summit invitees in at least one way: the way we choose our lawmakers.