At issue is Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires that certain states in the South get the permission of the Justice Department before making any election changes.

This ruling basically says that political units in the South can ask to be freed from Section 5 - in this case, it was a municipal utility board in Texas.

In the meantime, the Congress could step in and amend Section 5 and other portions of the Voting Rights Act that have come under political attack.

"If the statute remains the same by the time the next case arrives, the Court will invalidate the statute," wrote Tom Goldstein on his SCOTUS blog at scotusblog.com, which is simply the best site on the internet for news about US Supreme Court cases.

Goldstein raves about the way that the Chief Justice wrote this opinion, and frankly it is a very interesting read.

You can find it at http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/08pdf/08-322.pdf

While the Justices stuck together for the most part on this ruling, Justice Clarence Thomas came right out and said that Section 5 should be ruled unconstitutional.

That is a feeling shared by many Republicans in the South.

"I'm disappointed that the justices laid out the case for why the law is unconstitutional and then stopped short of tossing it," said Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-Georgia.)

"I do feel optimistic, however, that the court's dim view of Section 5 means the law will not survive for the full length of its 25-year renewal," he added in a written statement.

Experts believe there are five votes on the court right now to overturn Section 5. But for now, they weren't ready to overturn a portion of a historic Civil Rights law.