WebHolder held invalid a key provision of the Voting Rights Act. Specifically, the decision addressed the coverage formula in Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act that identified those covered jurisdictions that, due to indicators of a history of discrimination, were required by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to seek preclearance from the ... WebJun 25, 2013 · Section 4 of the Act provides the “coverage formula,” defining the “covered jurisdictions” as States or political subdivisions that maintained tests or devices as prerequisites to voting, and had low voter registration or turnout, in the 1960s and early 1970s. §1973b (b).

Shelby County v. Holder American Civil Liberties Union

Web[1] The formula covered jurisdictions that had maintained prohibitive voter registration and voting policies, and in which less than 50 percent of the voting age population was registered to vote or had voted in the last presidential election. WebAug 4, 2024 · The Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965 to ensure state and local governments do not pass laws or policies that deny American citizens the equal … slow rock concert live

Jurisdictions Previously Covered By Section 5

WebMay 30, 2024 · In Shelby County v. Holder (2013), a landmark case, the Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which provided the federal government with a formula to determine … WebOct 5, 2024 · The Voting Rights Act provides for the appointment of federal observers by order of a federal court pursuant to Section 3(a), ... South Dakota (1) and Texas (18). In light of the Shelby County decision, the Division is not relying on the Section 4(b) coverage formula as a way to identify jurisdictions for election monitoring. Hence, the ... soft white underbelly kat