enow.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...

    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.

  4. State Voting Rights Act - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Voting_Rights_Act

    However, the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Shelby County v. Holder (2013) invalidated the formula used to determine which jurisdictions were subject to preclearance, effectively weakening the VRA's protections. After Shelby County, many states moved quickly to implement restrictive voting laws that had previously been subject to federal ...

  5. John Lewis Voting Rights Act - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lewis_Voting_Rights_Act

    The bill was written in response to the Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder in 2013, which struck down the system that was used to determine which jurisdictions were subject to that requirement. [2] [3] On August 24, 2021, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the bill by a margin of 219–212. [4]

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

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

    2013. 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]

  7. Big Banks Target of New Probe into Financial Meltdown - AOL

    www.aol.com/2013/08/21/big-banks-target-new...

    Matt Rourke/APU.S. Attorney General Eric Holder U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is preparing to announce new cases related to the economic meltdown in the coming months as the Justice ...

  8. 'They have nothing to hang their heads about': Shelby ends ...

    www.aol.com/nothing-hang-heads-shelby-ends...

    The 2024 Shelby team is just the 11th Richland County volleyball team to play in the state tournament joining Madison's 1993, 1997 (state champions), 1998, 2008, 2010 and 2011, Crestview's 1985 ...

  9. Voting Rights Act of 1965 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965

    After this ruling, jurisdictions succeeded in at least 20 bailout actions before the Supreme Court held in Shelby County v. Holder (2013) that the coverage formula was unconstitutional. [129]: 54 Separate provisions allow a covered jurisdiction that has been certified to receive federal observers to bail out of its certification alone.