When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. South Carolina v. Katzenbach - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Carolina_v._Katzenbach

    South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 301 (1966), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court that rejected a challenge from the state of South Carolina to the preclearance provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which required that some states submit changes in election districts to the Attorney General of the United States (at the time, Nicholas Katzenbach). [1]

  3. List of landmark court decisions in the United States

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_landmark_court...

    South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 301 (1966) The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a valid exercise of Congress's power under Section 2 of the Fifteenth Amendment. Katzenbach v. Morgan, 384 U.S. 641 (1966) Congress may enact laws stemming from Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment that increase the rights of citizens beyond what the judiciary ...

  4. Voting Rights Act of 1965 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965

    The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the Section 5 preclearance requirement in three cases. The first case was South Carolina v. Katzenbach (1966), [171] which was decided about five months after the Act's enactment. The court held that Section 5 constituted a valid use of Congress's power to enforce the Fifteenth Amendment ...

  5. US Supreme Court backs S. Carolina Republicans in race-based ...

    www.aol.com/news/us-supreme-court-backs-carolina...

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court made it harder on Thursday to prove racial discrimination in electoral maps in a major ruling backing South Carolina Republicans who moved out 30,000 ...

  6. Katzenbach v. McClung - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katzenbach_v._McClung

    Katzenbach v. McClung , 379 U.S. 294 (1964), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court which unanimously held that Congress acted within its power under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution in forbidding racial discrimination in restaurants as this was a burden to interstate commerce .

  7. South Carolina is trading its all-male Supreme Court for an ...

    www.aol.com/news/south-carolina-trading-male...

    COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — South Carolina is about to trade its all-male state Supreme court for an all-white one.. The General Assembly, which picks almost all state judges, is expected Wednesday to ...

  8. List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 383

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States...

    South Carolina v. Katzenbach: 383 U.S. 301: 1966: Surowitz v. Hilton Hotels Corp. 383 U.S. 363: ... United States Supreme Court cases in volume 383 (Open Jurist)

  9. South Carolina Supreme Court strikes down state abortion ban

    www.aol.com/news/south-carolina-supreme-court...

    COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — The South Carolina Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a ban on abortion after six weeks, ruling the restriction enacted by the Deep South state violates a state ...