Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. 529 (2013), is a landmark decision [1] of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the constitutionality of two provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965: Section 5, which requires certain states and local governments to obtain federal preclearance before implementing any changes to their voting laws or practices; and subsection (b) of Section 4 ...
However, in the 2013 case Shelby County v. Holder, the United States Supreme Court struck down section 4(b) of the Act, which contained the formula that determined, based on historic racial discrimination, which states were required to seek preclearance. The court ruled the section unconstitutional, finding that although the provision had been ...
Democratic backsliding [a] is "a process of regime change towards autocracy that makes the exercise of political power more arbitrary and repressive and that restricts the space for public contestation and political participation in the process of government selection". [7][8] The Jim Crow era is among the most-cited historical examples of ...
In 2013 the Supreme Court, in Shelby County v. Holder , invalidated the Voting Rights Act's coverage formula; several bills have been proposed to create a new coverage formula. In 2014, the Voting Rights Amendments Act was introduced in Congress to create a new coverage formula and amend various other provisions. [ 42 ]
In 2013, the Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby County v. Holder weakened the Voting Rights Act, leading to a wave of voter suppression laws. At least 19 states, including Tennessee, passed ...
One v. Mukasey, which held that Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is constitutional. [14] Less than four years later, Tatel also wrote the majority opinion in Shelby County v. Holder, again upholding the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights. In a landmark voting rights decision, the Supreme Court eventually reversed his opinion ...
Activists distribute pro-voting rights placards outside the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 27, 2013, as the Court prepares to hear Shelby County vs Holder. Justice Ginsburg’s ...
Supreme Court ruled in the 5–4 Shelby County v. Holder decision that Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional. Section 4(b) stated that if states or local governments want to change their voting laws, they must appeal to the Attorney General. [65]