In the case of City of Rome et al. v. United States et al., 1979, the Supreme Court upheld provisions in the Voting Rights Act (VRA) of 1965 that required certain jurisdictions with a history of racial discrimination to obtain federal approval before changing their voting laws or procedures, a process known as "preclearance". The city of Rome, Georgia and several residents challenged this provision after changes they made to local election procedures were denied preclearance by the Attorney General. They argued that these sections violated principles of federalism and state sovereignty under Tenth Amendment and Fifteenth Amendment rights respectively. However, the court ruled in favor of upholding these VRA provisions stating that Congress had broad powers to enforce anti-discrimination laws under Section Two's enforcement clause within Fifteenth Amendment rights against race-based voter suppression tactics.

In the dissenting opinion for City of Rome et al. v. United States et al., Justice Rehnquist disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, arguing that it was not designed to permanently freeze election procedures in certain jurisdictions but rather to prevent changes that would worsen racial discrimination. He also contended that Congress did not intend for this section to be used as a tool for achieving proportional representation based on race or color and expressed concern about federal overreach into local affairs, which he believed could undermine state sovereignty and upset the balance between state and federal power established by the Constitution. Furthermore, he questioned whether there was sufficient evidence of ongoing systemic discrimination in voting practices to justify such an intrusive remedy under Section 5.