I found this:
Certain activities of political parties are subject to the preclearance requirement of Section 5. A change affecting voting effected by a political party is subject to the preclearance requirement: (a) If the change relates to a public electoral function of the party and (b) if the party is acting under authority explicitly or implicitly granted by a covered jurisdiction or political subunit subject to the preclearance requirement of Section 5. For example, changes with respect to the recruitment of party members, the conduct of political campaigns, and the drafting of party platforms are not subject to the preclearance requirement.
Changes with respect to the conduct of primary elections at which party nominees, delegates to party conventions, or party officials are chosen are subject to the preclearance requirement of Section 5. Where appropriate the term "jurisdiction" (but not "covered jurisdiction") includes political parties.
The question becomes this, were ALL THE CHANGES that occurred in this primary season, in caucuses, in state laws, in DNC RULINGS, subject to preclearance?
Did the DNC, for example, have to clear its decision to strip Florida and Michigan of delegates? Did it have to clear its rule that the candidates no campaign in those states?
I am not an election lawyer, but I see a lot of interesting possibilities here.
But lawyers can dream of many things. Here is the best interpretation - this ALTERNATE method of selecting delegates for Florida and Michigan is in CONFORMANCE WITH EXISTING DNC rules. There is no change of procedure at all. This is what the rules contemplate. To take a different tack is to make every DNC ruling subject to pre-clearance.
Update [2008-3-12 13:0:20 by Big Tent Democrat]: I found this at the Texas Depart of State site:
Thursday, December 20, 2007 (75th day before primary election day) Last recommended day for a county chair to submit changes affecting voting to U.S. Department of Justice for preclearance. The federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 requires that any change in any "standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting" be submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice for preclearance. Changes in election precincts, polling places, and various other actions require preclearance. Under Section 5, any change in a voting practice or procedure is legally unenforceable until the U.S. Attorney General (or a federal court in the District of Columbia) determines that the change does not have the purpose, or will not have the effect, of discriminating against racial or language minority group members.
The Attorney General of the U.S. Department of Justice has 60 days in which to interpose an objection to a submitted change affecting voting. Therefore, if the county executive committee has not already reviewed actions since the last primary elections to see if any changes must be submitted for preclearance, this should be done as soon as possible. If changes need to be made at the last minute, the Justice Department may be able to give the submission expedited consideration.
The Texas caucus rules were still being haggled over days before the caucus. Houston, I think we have a problem . . .
