When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Shelby County v. Holder - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelby_County_v._Holder

    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 ...

  3. List of jurisdictions subject to the special provisions of ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_jurisdictions...

    The coverage formula, contained in Section 4(b) of the Act, determines which states are subject to preclearance. As enacted in 1965, the first element in the formula was whether, on November 1, 1964, the state or a political subdivision of the state maintained a "test or device" restricting the opportunity to register and vote.

  4. State Voting Rights Act - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Voting_Rights_Act

    [15] [16] Preclearance was the key feature of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 before it was rendered inoperable by the Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder. Under the VRA, preclearance required jurisdictions with a history of racial discrimination in voting to receive approval from the federal government before implementing any changes to ...

  5. Voting Rights Act of 1965 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965

    [133]: 233 Between 1965 and the Supreme Court's 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder to strike down the coverage formula, the attorney general certified 153 local governments across 11 states. [151] Because of time and resource constraints, federal observers are not assigned to every certified jurisdiction for every election.

  6. Amendments to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amendments_to_the_Voting...

    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 ]

  7. Timeline of voting rights in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_voting_rights...

    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. [66]

  8. Could Shelby County have its first community oversight board ...

    www.aol.com/could-shelby-county-first-community...

    Brooke Muckerman covers Shelby County Government for The Commercial Appeal. She can be reached at (901) 484-6225, brooke.muckerman@commercialappeal.com and followed on X, formerly known as Twitter ...

  9. Voter identification laws in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_identification_laws...

    Law struck down by Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard L. McGinley on January 17, 2014, as "violative of the constitutional rights of state voters" after first full evidentiary trial since Shelby v Holder (2013). The law was found, by preponderance of evidence, to place undue burden on hundreds of thousands of already registered voters due to a ...