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 ...
(Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court denied on Tuesday a bid by former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has endorsed Republican Donald Trump, to be removed from the ...
State voting laws are drifting in opposite directions in today's age of politics. Despite these restrictions and despite the Supreme Court weakening voter protections in recent years, one law has ...
During arguments, Supreme Court justices signaled sympathy toward Trump's appeal of a Dec. 19 ruling by Colorado's top court to disqualify him from the state's ballot under the U.S. Constitution's ...
[100] [101] [102] [55] "No one, no one is above the law, not even the president of the United States. [With] today’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally changed for all practical purposes,” Biden said. [3] Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said July 1, 2024 was a "sad day for America. Treason or incitement ...
Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, 594 U.S. ___ (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case related to voting rights established by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), and specifically the applicability of Section 2's general provision barring discrimination against minorities in state and local election laws in the wake of the 2013 Supreme Court decision Shelby County v.
The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down Republican-drawn congressional districts in Alabama that civil rights activists say discriminated against Black voters.
Before 1990, the rules of the Supreme Court also stated that "a writ of injunction may be granted by any Justice in a case where it might be granted by the Court." [195] However, this part of the rule (and all other specific mention of injunctions) was removed in the Supreme Court's rules revision of December 1989.