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. Hugo Black - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Black

    United States, 379 U.S. 241 (1964), and Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 (1964). [citation needed] In several other federalism cases, however, Black ruled against the federal government. For instance, he partially dissented from South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 301 (1966), in which the court upheld the validity of the Voting Rights Act ...

  5. Early voting is biggest expansion of voting rights in recent ...

    www.aol.com/news/early-voting-biggest-expansion...

    For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us

  6. Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifteenth_Amendment_to_the...

    In Guinn v. United States (1915), [55] a unanimous Court struck down an Oklahoma grandfather clause that effectively exempted white voters from a literacy test, finding it to be discriminatory. The Court ruled in the related case Myers v. Anderson (1915), that the officials who enforced such a clause were liable for civil damages. [56] [57]

  7. South Carolina in the civil rights movement - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Carolina_in_the...

    In the Supreme Court decision of South Carolina v. Katzenbach (1966), Justice Earl Warren authored in the majority opinion that preventing racial discrimination was a "legitimate response" of Congress and that South Carolina's intentions were generated from "insidious and pervasive evil". [38]

  8. 5 Signs You May Have a Snake Infestation and Not Even Know It

    www.aol.com/5-signs-may-snake-infestation...

    “Snakes need a gap to get in your home, so you’ll probably find gaps or cracks in the foundation, doors, or windows,” Nicole Carpenter, President at Black Pest Prevention in North Carolina ...

  9. Civil Rights Act - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act

    In South Carolina v. Katzenbach (1966) the Supreme Court also held that Congress had the power to pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965 under its Enforcement Powers stemming from the Fifteenth Amendment: Congress exercised its authority under the Fifteenth Amendment in an inventive manner when it enacted the Voting Rights Act of 1965. First: the ...