The Constitution of the United States is over 200 years old.  Does that mean it is not relevant to the issues of today?  The age of a law has no bearing on whether or not it is just.  The opponents of the Voting Rights Act say it needs to be updated, but they never address the over 1000 objections to discriminatory voting plans filed by the DOJ since the last reauthorization in 1982.  They never address the persistent evidence of discrimination in the states covered by Section 5 that affect people in rural areas, the elderly, the disabled, ethnic and language minorities who are all citizens of this nation.

Anyone who is seriously interested in updating the act would introduce legislation that confronts the contemporary evidence of voting discrimination.  Instead, the Westmoreland and Norwood amendments are simply ways for states that violate voting rights law to get out from under the supervision of the law.  It's like the fox guarding the chicken house.  Law is not meant to relieve the discomfort of violators, but to implement a standard of compliance that upholds our principles of democracy.