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. 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 ...

  4. File:SHELBY COUNTY ALABAMA V. HOLDER NOTICE OF APPEAL.pdf

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SHELBY_COUNTY_ALABAMA...

    Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Donate

  5. 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 ]

  6. Voter identification laws in the United States - Wikipedia

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

    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 ...

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

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

    In 2006, the coverage formula was again extended for 25 years. In Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the Supreme Court of the United States struck down the coverage formula as unconstitutional, meaning that no jurisdiction is currently subject to preclearance under the coverage formula.

  8. AOL Mail

    mail.aol.com

    Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!

  9. Voter suppression in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression_in_the...

    In its 2014 Shelby County v. Holder decision, the Supreme Court of the United States allowed jurisdictions with a history of suppression of minority voters to avoid continuing to abide by federal preclearance requirements for changes in voter registration and casting of ballots. Within 24 hours of that ruling, Alabama implemented a previously ...