Add to ORKGThe Supreme Court of the United States held that a covered jurisdiction under section 5 of the Voting Rights Act cannot be denied preclearance of a nonretrogressive redistricting plan even if the plan is enacted with a discriminatory purpose. Reno v. Bossier Parish Sch. Bd., 120 S. Ct. 866 (2000)
In 1991, reapportionment and redistricting were the most open, democratic, and racially egalitarian...
This Article’s analysis reveals that by the 1990s the intent, or purpose, prong of Section 5 had bec...
Gerrymandering through the method of redistricting poses a grave threat to our democracy. Redistrict...
The United States Supreme Court ruled that a vote dilution violation under Section 2 of the Voting R...
The Supreme Court of the United States held that the allegation that a North Carolina General Assemb...
This Case Note examines a recent Supreme Court decision that collapses the purpose and effect prongs...
State and local governments covered by the preclearance provision in Section 5 of the Voting Rights ...
Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 requires certain jurisdictions with a history of racial d...
In McCrory v. Harris, the Supreme Court is faced with yet another redistricting case: Are the first ...
In McCrory v. Harris, the Supreme Court is faced with yet another redistricting case: Are the first ...
This Case Note examines a recent Supreme Court decision that collapses the purpose and effect prongs...
Wilson raises two questions that are basic to the use of benign racial classifications in drawing ...
The United States Supreme Court held that a North Carolina congressional districting plan did not vi...
In 1991, reapportionment and redistricting were the most open, democratic, and racially egalitarian...
Shelby County Invalidated the Section 5 Coverage Formula In Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder, 133 ...
In 1991, reapportionment and redistricting were the most open, democratic, and racially egalitarian...
This Article’s analysis reveals that by the 1990s the intent, or purpose, prong of Section 5 had bec...
Gerrymandering through the method of redistricting poses a grave threat to our democracy. Redistrict...
The United States Supreme Court ruled that a vote dilution violation under Section 2 of the Voting R...
The Supreme Court of the United States held that the allegation that a North Carolina General Assemb...
This Case Note examines a recent Supreme Court decision that collapses the purpose and effect prongs...
State and local governments covered by the preclearance provision in Section 5 of the Voting Rights ...
Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 requires certain jurisdictions with a history of racial d...
In McCrory v. Harris, the Supreme Court is faced with yet another redistricting case: Are the first ...
In McCrory v. Harris, the Supreme Court is faced with yet another redistricting case: Are the first ...
This Case Note examines a recent Supreme Court decision that collapses the purpose and effect prongs...
Wilson raises two questions that are basic to the use of benign racial classifications in drawing ...
The United States Supreme Court held that a North Carolina congressional districting plan did not vi...
In 1991, reapportionment and redistricting were the most open, democratic, and racially egalitarian...
Shelby County Invalidated the Section 5 Coverage Formula In Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder, 133 ...
In 1991, reapportionment and redistricting were the most open, democratic, and racially egalitarian...
This Article’s analysis reveals that by the 1990s the intent, or purpose, prong of Section 5 had bec...
Gerrymandering through the method of redistricting poses a grave threat to our democracy. Redistrict...