CHANNILLO
On May 18, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
D.C. Circuit affirmed the District Court’s decision up- holding the constitutionality of Section 4(b) and Section 5. After reviewing the evidence in the Congressional record associated with the 2006 reauthorization of Section 5, the appellate court accepted Congress’s conclusion that Section 2 litigation by the U.S. Attorney General remained inade- quate in the covered jurisdictions to protect the rights of minority voters, that Section 5 was therefore still justified, and that the coverage formula continued to pass constitu- tional muster.
At the Supreme Court
Shelby County filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court to review th">
Chapter Twenty-Three: Voting Rights and Voting Wrongs (2)
Series Info | Table of Contents
On May 18, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
D.C. Circuit affirmed the District Court’s decision up- holding the constitutionality of Section 4(b) and Section 5. After reviewing the evidence in the Congressional record associated with the 2006 reauthorization of Section 5, the appellate court accepted Congress’s conclusion that Section 2 litigation by the U.S. Attorney General remained inade- quate in the covered jurisdictions to protect the rights of minority voters, that Section 5 was therefore still justified, and that the coverage formula continued to pass constitu- tional muster.
At the Supreme Court
Shelby County filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court to review th...
Please subscribe to keep reading.