By Greg Penglis and Grok AI, Tuesday, August 19, 2025
Introduction:
There is a gerrymandering war going on between Democrats and Republicans over who can screw up the voting districts more. As usual it is the voters who suffer because the individual right to vote, and the equal power of every vote, is completely subverted by the voting district war currently going on.
This is but one symptom of a much larger problem. The Voting Rights Act is obsolete. Instead of solving the problems of previous grievances, at this point it is creating entirely new ones. It’s like with affirmative action. People who were previously discriminated against getting jobs from segregation, racial discrimination, prejudice, or otherwise, aren’t at the point of life they were when the offense occurred, if they are working still or even with us at all. So there is no way to redress those discriminations.
The logic of the Left is that people of that same racial, ethnic, sex, or other characteristic, should be promoted today, ahead of others who in the words of Michelle Obama, have to put their life on hold. This results in rewarding people who suffered no harm, and punishing people who did no wrong. Usually this involves promoting women and minorities in advance of white men, for no reason at all other than a political victim class agenda. The Voting Rights Act works pretty much the same way.
There will be many efforts by the Trump Administration, Congress, and media to offer temporary bandage like tinkering solutions that may resolve an issue or two today, but won’t stand the test of time or resolve all the other problems that will come up by both parties as they engage in their endless petty turf wars for power and control, where the citizenry will continue to come up short.
As President Trump is trying to take away the war from Ukraine and Russia, this bill completely replaces the Voting Rights Act and takes away a major war machine in law from the Democrat Left. It’s time for the Voting Rights Act to be replaced.
Writing the Bill:
Grok AI has been an invaluable tool for research, writing, and saving time. Things that would normally take months of research can be done in a matter of hours. My usual process is to ask a bunch of questions, get gobs of material from Grok AI, filter through it, and create a bill from all that material, usually involving multiple rewrites of different sections until a final bill emerges.
Breaking tradition I shall post immediately below, the final form of the bill, and then provide all the supplementary documentation from my questions to Grok AI and the answers provided.
*****
The Individual Voting Rights Act of 2025
A BILL: To repeal the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and enact the Individual Voting Rights Act of 2025, to protect the voting rights of individual citizens of the United States without regard to race, ethnicity, language, or other group characteristics, to prohibit practices that grant preferences or detriments based on such characteristics, to require an artificial intelligence model as a standard for comparison in redistricting to ensure neutrality and prevent gerrymandering and fraud, and to align voting rights protections with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Fifteenth Amendment.
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.This Act may be cited as the “Individual Voting Rights Act of 2025.”
SECTION 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings. Congress finds that—
(1) The right to vote is a fundamental individual right guaranteed to all citizens of the United States under the Constitution, including the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments.
(2) All citizens of the United States, including those naturalized, are required to demonstrate proficiency in the English language as a condition of citizenship, with limited exceptions, ensuring that all voters are capable of participating in elections using English-language materials.
(3) Voting practices that grant preferences or impose detriments based on race, ethnicity, language, or other group characteristics violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by treating individuals unequally.
(4) The creation or maintenance of voting districts or procedures designed to enhance or preserve the voting power of any group, whether defined by race, ethnicity, or other characteristics, constitutes impermissible discrimination.
(5) A voting rights framework focused solely on the equal protection of individual citizens’ rights to vote, without regard to group membership, is necessary to ensure fairness, uniformity, and constitutional compliance.
(6) Redistricting based on objective, neutral criteria, such as equal numbers of qualified voters, geographic contiguity, and compactness, ensures impartiality and prevents manipulation for political or group-based purposes. An artificial intelligence model prioritizing population density of qualified voters, regular district shapes, and equal numbers of qualified voters provides a transparent, non-political standard for comparison to prevent gerrymandering and fraud.
(b) Purpose. The purpose of this Act is to—
(1) Repeal the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. §§ 10101–10702) and replace it with a new statute that protects the voting rights of individual citizens without reference to race, ethnicity, language, or other group characteristics.
(2) Prohibit any voting qualification, practice, or procedure that denies or abridges the right to vote of any individual citizen based on any characteristic.
(3) Require that all voting materials be provided exclusively in the English language, consistent with the requirements of U.S. citizenship.
(4) Ban the use of race, ethnicity, or other group characteristics in the creation or maintenance of voting districts or other electoral procedures.
(5) Require the creation of an artificial intelligence model for redistricting, prioritizing population density of qualified voters, regular district shapes, and equal numbers of qualified voters, to serve as a standard for comparison to ensure neutrality and fairness and to prevent gerrymandering and fraud.
SECTION 3. REPEAL OF THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. §§ 10101–10702), as amended, is repealed.
SECTION 4. ENACTMENT OF THE INDIVIDUAL VOTING RIGHTS ACT.
The following new chapter is added to title 52 of the United States Code:
CHAPTER 101—INDIVIDUAL VOTING RIGHTS
§ 10101. Definitions In this chapter:
(1) The term “voting” includes all actions necessary to make a vote effective in any primary, special, or general election, including registration, casting a ballot, and having such ballot counted.
(2) The term “voting materials” includes ballots, voter registration forms, voting instructions, and other documents or notices provided to voters by a State or political subdivision in connection with an election.
(3) The term “qualified voters” means citizens of the United States who are 18 years of age or older and not disqualified from voting under the laws of the applicable State or political subdivision.
§ 10102. Protection of Individual Voting Rights(a) Prohibition of Discrimination.
(a) No voting qualification, prerequisite to voting, standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision in a manner that denies or abridges the right of any individual citizen of the United States to vote on account of any characteristic, including but not limited to race, ethnicity, language, or any other classification.
(b) Standard for Violation. A violation of subsection (a) is established if, based on the totality of circumstances, it is shown that any individual citizen is denied the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice, provided that such denial is on account of a characteristic prohibited under subsection (a). No consideration shall be given to the collective voting power or electoral outcomes of any group, whether defined by race, ethnicity, language, or any other characteristic, in determining whether such a denial has occurred.
(c) Individual Right. The right to vote is an individual right. No State or political subdivision shall adopt any practice or procedure that grants a preference or imposes a detriment on any individual citizen based on their membership in any group, whether defined by race, ethnicity, language, or any other characteristic.
§ 10103. English Language Requirement for Voting Materials(a) English-Only Requirement.
(a) All voting materials provided by any State or political subdivision for federal, state, or local elections shall be written and presented exclusively in the English language.
(b) Prohibition on Multilingual Materials. No State or political subdivision shall provide voting materials in any language other than English.
(c) Individual Assistance. This section shall not be construed to prohibit assistance to individual voters, such as oral translation or physical assistance, as permitted under applicable federal or state law, provided such assistance does not involve the provision of written voting materials in a language other than English.
§ 10104. Prohibition on Group-Based Electoral Practices.
(a) Prohibition. No State or political subdivision shall create, maintain, or consider voting districts, electoral procedures, or other voting practices designed to enhance, preserve, or diminish the voting power or electoral outcomes of any group, whether defined by race, ethnicity, language, or any other characteristic.
(b) Redistricting. In establishing or modifying voting districts, States and political subdivisions shall use neutral criteria, such as equal numbers of qualified voters, geographic contiguity, and compactness, and shall not consider race, ethnicity, language, or any other group characteristic as a factor in district design.
(c) Enforcement. Any voting district or electoral procedure found to have been created or maintained with the intent or effect of enhancing or diminishing the voting power of any group based on race, ethnicity, language, or other characteristic shall be deemed invalid.
§ 10105. Enforcement(a) Attorney General Authority for Civil Actions.
(a) Whenever the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe that a violation of this chapter has occurred, the Attorney General may institute a civil action in an appropriate district court of the United States to seek appropriate relief, including injunctive relief, declaratory judgment, or other equitable relief. Such relief shall not include any requirement to create or maintain voting districts or procedures based on race, ethnicity, language, or any other group characteristic.
(b) Attorney General Authority for Criminal Prosecution. Whenever the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe that a person or entity, including a State, political subdivision, political party, or independent commission, has intentionally violated this chapter, including by engaging in gerrymandering or creating voting districts to enhance the electoral power of a political party or entity in a manner that denies or abridges the voting rights of any individual citizen, or fails to comply with the neutral criteria or AI-based redistricting standards under § 10104 and § 10107, such violation shall be considered election fraud and a civil rights violation under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, prosecutable under applicable federal civil rights laws, including but not limited to 18 U.S.C. § 241 and 18 U.S.C. § 242. The Attorney General may institute a criminal prosecution in an appropriate district court of the United States. Penalties for such violations may include:
(1) For individuals, a fine of not more than $100,000, imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or both, per violation.
(2) For entities, a fine of not more than $1,000,000 per violation.
(c) Private Right of Action. Any individual citizen aggrieved by a violation of this chapter may bring a civil action in an appropriate district court of the United States to seek appropriate relief, including injunctive relief, declaratory judgment, or other equitable relief, but not including any requirement to create or maintain voting districts or procedures based on race, ethnicity, language, or any other group characteristic.
(d) Investigation and Enforcement. The Attorney General shall investigate any alleged violation of this chapter, including failure to comply with the requirement to create and publish an AI model under § 10107. If such investigation establishes probable cause of a violation, the Attorney General shall pursue appropriate civil or criminal action to enforce this chapter, recognizing that such violations constitute civil rights violations under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, prosecutable under applicable federal civil rights laws.
(e) Personal Liability of Elected and Government Officials. Elected and government officials, including but not limited to state legislators, governors, members of state redistricting commissions, federal government officials, members of the United States Congress, and members of the federal judiciary, but excluding the President of the United States, who create, approve, or implement voting districts in violation of this chapter, including by engaging in gerrymandering, failing to comply with the neutral criteria under § 10104, or failing to create and publish the AI model under § 10107, shall be personally liable for such violations. No immunity, including qualified or sovereign immunity, shall apply to such officials for actions taken in violation of this chapter. Such officials may be subject to:
(1) Civil actions instituted by the Attorney General under subsection (a) for injunctive relief, declaratory judgment, or other equitable relief.
(2) Criminal prosecution by the Attorney General under subsection (b) for election fraud and civil rights violations, with penalties as specified therein.
(3) Individual civil actions by aggrieved citizens under subsection (c), including for compensatory or punitive damages, as permitted by the court, in addition to equitable relief.
§ 10106. Uniform Standards for Voting
(a) General Rule. All States and political subdivisions shall ensure that voting qualifications, procedures, and practices are applied uniformly to all individual citizens without regard to any characteristic.
(b) Prohibition on Discriminatory Purpose or Effect. No State or political subdivision shall adopt any voting practice with the purpose or effect of denying or abridging the right of any individual citizen to vote based on any characteristic.
§ 10107. AI-Based Redistricting Standards(a) Requirement.
(a) Any State, political subdivision, or other entity, including political parties or independent commissions, proposing or establishing voting districts shall create an artificial intelligence model, developed and approved by the Attorney General, to serve as a standard for comparison. The model shall:
(1) Use population density of qualified voters as the primary criterion for district design, prioritizing the distribution of qualified voter concentrations to create cohesive and geographically logical districts, while ensuring compliance with the equal numbers of qualified voters requirement under § 10104(b).
(2) Generate districts with the most regular geometric shapes possible, prioritizing shapes such as squares or hexagons to minimize irregularity, as measured by metrics such as the Polsby-Popper or Reock compactness scores.
(3) Ensure the most equal numbers of qualified voters across districts, consistent with constitutional requirements for one-person, one-vote.
(b) Compliance. Proposed voting districts shall be considered valid only if they comply with all provisions of this chapter to maintain voting as a purely individual right, with no advantage or detriment to any individual or group based on race, ethnicity, language, or any other characteristic. Prior to enactment of any redistricting plan, States and political subdivisions shall create and publish an AI model of all districts within the State, based solely on equal numbers of qualified voters as specified in this section, to serve as a transparent standard for comparison to any proposed redistricting plan. Failure to comply with this chapter, including the requirement to create and publish the AI model, shall result in investigation, enforcement action, and potential prosecution by the Attorney General for violating any provision of this chapter.
(c) Implementation. The Attorney General shall promulgate regulations within 180 days of the enactment of this chapter to establish standards for the development, transparency, and public access of the AI model to ensure impartiality and verifiability.
SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this Act or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this Act and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
*****
The Story of How This Bill Came About.
It all started with a question to Grok AI. My question is in bold.
So what if we went all out and wrote a bill that covers every part of the Voter Rights Act codified in US Law, and removed every single racial, ethnic, non-english, preferential sections and made it purely an individual voter rights act, eliminating and banning, all reference to race, ethnicity, group, voting power, creating districts based on any of the prohibited categories of this request, what would you write for me?
Your goal is to create a comprehensive bill that reforms the entire Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), codified primarily in 52 U.S.C. §§ 10101–10702, by removing all provisions that reference or provide protections based on race, ethnicity, language minority status, or group voting power, and reorienting the law to focus exclusively on the voting rights of individual citizens.
The bill would prohibit any consideration of race, ethnicity, or other group characteristics in voting practices, including redistricting, and eliminate requirements for multilingual ballots, while ensuring that voting rights are protected equally for all individuals without granting preferences or detriments based on group membership.
This aligns with your view that such group-based provisions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment by allowing racial or ethnic preferences, such as majority-minority districts or language accommodations.
Below, I’ll propose a bill that replaces the VRA with a new statute, the “Individual Voting Rights Act of 2025,” which consolidates and revises the VRA’s core protections to focus solely on individual rights, eliminates all references to race, ethnicity, language minorities, or group voting power, and bans practices like redistricting based on these characteristics.
I’ll also provide an explanation of the changes, their legal implications, and how they address your concerns about constitutional violations.
Proposed Bill:
Individual Voting Rights Act of 2025:
A BILL to repeal the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and enact the Individual Voting Rights Act of 2025, to protect the voting rights of individual citizens of the United States without regard to race, ethnicity, language, or other group characteristics, to prohibit practices that grant preferences or detriments based on such characteristics, and to align voting rights protections with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Explanation of the Bill:
1. Repeal of the Voting Rights Act of 1965:
The bill repeals the entire VRA (52 U.S.C. §§ 10101–10702) to eliminate all provisions that reference race, ethnicity, language minorities, or group voting power. This includes:
Section 2 (52 U.S.C. § 10301): Prohibits vote denial or dilution based on race or color, with judicial interpretations (e.g., Thornburg v. Gingles) protecting minority group voting power.
Section 3 (52 U.S.C. § 10302): Allows federal oversight of jurisdictions with a history of discrimination, often tied to racial or ethnic disparities.
Section 4 (52 U.S.C. § 10303): Includes preclearance requirements (largely inoperative after Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. 529 (2013)) and protections for language minorities (e.g., Section 4(e) for citizens educated in American-flag schools).
Section 5 (52 U.S.C. § 10304): Requires preclearance of voting changes in covered jurisdictions, often to protect racial or ethnic minorities.
Section 203 (52 U.S.C. § 10503): Mandates multilingual ballots for language minority groups.
Other sections (e.g., Sections 6–8, 11) involve enforcement mechanisms tied to racial or ethnic discrimination.
Repealing the VRA ensures a clean slate, avoiding conflicts with existing provisions or judicial interpretations.
2. New Chapter: Individual Voting Rights Act:
The bill replaces the VRA with a streamlined statute (52 U.S.C. § 10101 et seq.) that focuses exclusively on individual voting rights. Key provisions include:
§ 10102 (Protection of Individual Voting Rights): Replaces Section 2, prohibiting any voting practice that denies or abridges an individual’s right to vote based on any characteristic (not limited to race or ethnicity, to ensure broad protection). It explicitly bans consideration of group voting power, preventing practices like majority-minority districts.
§ 10103 (English Language Requirement): Mandates English-only ballots, consistent with your prior request, based on the rationale that citizenship requires English proficiency (per 8 U.S.C. § 1423). It allows individual assistance (e.g., oral translation) to address accessibility but prohibits non-English written materials.
§ 10104 (Prohibition on Group-Based Electoral Practices): Explicitly bans redistricting or other practices designed to enhance or diminish group voting power, requiring neutral criteria (e.g., population equality, compactness). This addresses your concern about race-based gerrymandering violating the 14th Amendment.
§ 10105 (Enforcement): Retains enforcement mechanisms (Attorney General and private actions) but prohibits remedies that involve group-based considerations, ensuring alignment with individual rights.
§ 10106 (Uniform Standards): Requires uniform application of voting rules to all individuals, reinforcing equal protection.
Alignment with Your Goals:
Elimination of Racial, Ethnic, and Language Preferences: All references to race, ethnicity, language minorities, or group voting power are removed. The law uses broad, neutral language (“any characteristic”) to avoid singling out specific groups, aligning with your view that group-based protections constitute discrimination.
Individual Voting Rights: The bill emphasizes voting as an individual right, prohibiting any practice that grants preferences or detriments based on group membership.
English-Only Ballots: The requirement for English-only voting materials replaces Section 203 and other language-related provisions (e.g., Section 4(e)), based on the citizenship English proficiency requirement.
Redistricting Ban: Section 10104 explicitly prohibits race- or ethnicity-based districting, addressing your concern about majority-minority districts as violations of equal protection.
Constitutional Alignment:
14th Amendment (Equal Protection Clause): By eliminating group-based considerations and focusing on individual rights, the bill aligns with strict scrutiny requirements for race-based actions (e.g., Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993); Miller v. Johnson, 515 U.S. 900 (1995)). It avoids classifications that favor or disadvantage any group, ensuring race-neutral treatment.
15th Amendment: The bill protects against vote denial based on any characteristic, fulfilling the 15th Amendment’s mandate without relying on group-specific protections.
Citizenship Requirements: The English-only provision is grounded in the naturalization requirement for English proficiency (8 U.S.C. § 1423), though exceptions for certain citizens (e.g., those from Puerto Rico or exempt due to age) may require consideration in legal challenges.
Legal and Practical Implications:
1. Impact on Existing Precedent:
The bill overrides judicial interpretations like Thornburg v. Gingles (478 U.S. 30, 1986), which established the framework for protecting minority voting power against dilution. By prohibiting group-based considerations, it nullifies cases upholding majority-minority districts (e.g., Bartlett v. Strickland, 556 U.S. 1 (2009)).
The repeal of preclearance provisions (Sections 4 and 5) codifies the effect of Shelby County v. Holder (570 U.S. 529, 2013), which struck down the coverage formula, but goes further by eliminating all related mechanisms.
Courts may interpret the broad prohibition on “any characteristic” as expanding protections beyond race to other classifications, though the focus on individual rights should limit group-based claims.
2. Potential Legal Challenges:
Equal Protection: Opponents may argue that the English-only requirement or the removal of group protections disproportionately harms racial or ethnic minorities, violating equal protection. The bill’s race-neutral language and tie to citizenship requirements provide a defense, but courts may apply heightened scrutiny if disparate impact is shown.
15th Amendment: Critics might claim the bill weakens protections against systemic discrimination, though the broad prohibition on vote denial in § 10102 should address this.
Section 203 Repeal: Eliminating multilingual ballots could face challenges under prior cases like Katzenbach v. Morgan (384 U.S. 641, 1966), which upheld language protections. The bill’s reliance on citizenship standards and individual assistance provisions may mitigate this.
3. Practical Effects:
Redistricting: States would need to redraw districts using only neutral criteria, potentially reducing majority-minority districts. This could alter electoral outcomes in areas with concentrated minority populations.
Voting Materials: Jurisdictions would transition to English-only ballots, simplifying administration but requiring voter education for citizens accustomed to multilingual materials.
Enforcement: The Attorney General and private litigants could still challenge discriminatory practices, but remedies would focus on individual access rather than group outcomes.
4. Political and Public Reaction:
The wholesale repeal of the VRA, a landmark civil rights law, would likely be highly contentious. X posts and public discourse (based on my ability to analyze sentiment) indicate strong divisions on voting rights reforms, with some supporting race-neutral policies and others defending group protections as necessary to address historical inequities.
The bill’s framing as an equal protection measure may resonate with those concerned about reverse discrimination, but advocacy groups may argue it undermines minority voting access.
5. State Law Interactions:The bill preempts state laws requiring multilingual ballots or race-based districting under the Supremacy Clause. States like California or Texas, with significant language minority populations, may need to adjust their election practices.
Additional Notes
Comprehensive Scope: The bill covers all major VRA provisions by repealing the entire Act and replacing it with a streamlined statute. If you want to retain specific enforcement mechanisms (e.g., federal observers, formerly in Section 8), I can add tailored provisions.
Findings Section: The findings articulate the constitutional and citizenship-based rationale, which can help defend against legal challenges and clarify intent for courts.
Severability and Effective Date: These ensure the law’s resilience and immediate implementation, though Congress may need to address transition periods for compliance.
My Conclusion:
More than anything, this bill brings federal law into compliance with the Constitution, particularly the 14th and 15th Amendments. There is no excuse in law for rewarding people that suffered no harm, and punishing people who did no wrong, to redress a grievance long since past, that can’t be corrected for the people that did suffer harm, or to punish the people that caused the harm.
There is also no reason or justification for leaving bad law on the books so that it can be exploited for political gain, power, money, voters, voter district manipulation, political party growth, political victories, to tamper with our electoral system, or to affect in any way the ability of every citizen to have equal power, and equal representation.
This country in its founding documents clearly states that we are a nation of individuals with individual rights, and that no group or entity within this country has more rights or more power than the individual. It is in that spirit that the Voting Rights Act in the US Code of Laws must be replaced by this Individual Voting Rights Act.
ENDORSEMENTS:
BILL STATUS:
COMMENTS: