Skip to main content
Home
Campaign Legal Center
Main Menu

Header

  • The Latest
  • Issues
    • Campaign Finance
    • Ethics
    • Redistricting
    • Voting Rights
  • Cases & Actions
  • About
    • Staff
    • Trustees & Advisors
    • Careers
    • Support Our Work

Header Secondary

  • Contact CLC
  • Media Center
  • Get Updates
  • Search
  • Donate

Filter by Type

  • Article (350)
  • (-) Case / Action (70)
  • (-) Document (635)
  • Media Mention (0)
  • (-) Press Release (213)

Filter by Issue Area

  • Campaign Finance (2138)
  • Ethics (346)
  • Redistricting (525)
  • (-) Voting Rights (918)

Filter by Document Type

  • Decision (65)
  • Document (570)

Filter by Case/Action Status

  • Active (46)
  • Closed (24)
Displaying 901 - 918 of 918 Results

Shelby County, AL v. Holder: Solicitor General's Merits Brief

Document
Case
Shelby County, AL v. Holder

Answers the question as to whether Congress’s decision in 2006 to reauthorize Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), 42 U.S.C. 1973c, under the pre-existing coverage formula of Section 4(b) of the VRA, 42 U.S.C. 1973b(b), exceeded its authority under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments and thus violated the Tenth Amendment and Article IV of the United States Constitution.

Veasey v. Abbott: Veasey-LULAC Appellee Brief

Document
Case
Veasey v. Abbott

Based on voluminous evidence, mostly uncontradicted, the district court made findings of fact supporting judgment for Plaintiffs on all four challenges to S.B. 14: (1) discriminatory purpose, (2) discriminatory results, (3) poll tax, and (4) undue burden on the right to vote. The district court made its findings with care, applied the correct legal standards, faithfully followed procedural rules, issued an appropriate remedy, and should be affirmed. 

Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One ("NAMUDNO") v. Holder

Updated
April 22, 2015
Status
Closed
Issues
Voting Rights
A small utility district near Austin unsuccessfully challenged the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which required the Department of Justice or the United States District Court for D.C. to approve all voting changes in certain jurisdictions before those changes could go into...

Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Gonzales District Court’s opinion (May 30, 2008)

Decision
Case
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One ("NAMUDNO") v. Holder

Northwest Austin MUD v. Gonzales: Defendant’s memorandum in support of a motion for summary judgment (May 15, 2007)

Document
Case
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One ("NAMUDNO") v. Holder

Northwest Austin MUD v. Gonzales: Complaint reply brief by the Department of Justice (October 16, 2006)

Document
Case
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One ("NAMUDNO") v. Holder

Northwest Austin MUD v. Gonzales: Brennan Center's Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment (May 15, 2007)

Document
Case
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One ("NAMUDNO") v. Holder

Northwest Austin MUD v. Gonzales:Travis County’s motion for summary judgment with accompanying memorandum (May 15, 2007)

Document
Case
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One ("NAMUDNO") v. Holder

Northwest Austin MUD v. Gonzales: MALDEF's memorandum in support of motion for summary judgment (May 15, 2007)

Document
Case
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One ("NAMUDNO") v. Holder

Northwest Austin MUD v. Gonzales: NAACP's memorandum in support of motion for summary judgment (May 15, 2007)

Document
Case
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One ("NAMUDNO") v. Holder

Northwest Austin MUD v. Gonzales: Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment with memorandum (May 15, 2007)

Document
Case
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One ("NAMUDNO") v. Holder

Northwest Austin MUD v. Gonzales: Plaintiffs amended complaint (February 1, 2007)

Document
Case
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One ("NAMUDNO") v. Holder

Northwest Austin MUD v. Gonzales: Plaintiffs motion for leave to file amended complaint (February 1, 2007)

Document
Case
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One ("NAMUDNO") v. Holder

Northwest Austin MUD v. Gonzales: Complaint filed by the Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District seeking bailout from Voting Rights Act (August 4, 2006)

Document
Case
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One ("NAMUDNO") v. Holder

Northwest Austin MUD v. Gonzales: Jurisdictional statement filed by the petitioners (July 7, 2008)

Document
Case
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One ("NAMUDNO") v. Holder

Shelby County, AL v. Holder

Updated
April 22, 2015
Status
Closed
Issues
Voting Rights
A county in Alabama successfully challenged the continued constitutionality of Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act, which contained a formula identifying those jurisdictions that had to comply with the “preclearance” requirements of Section 5—i.e., receive approval from the Department of Justice...

Texas v. Holder

Updated
April 21, 2015
Status
Closed
Issues
Voting Rights
The State of Texas unsuccessfully sought preclearance approval under the Voting Rights Act of its 2011 voter photo ID law (SB 14); a three-judge court found the State failed to prove the law was non-discriminatory. The Supreme Court vacated the judgment following its decision in Shelby County v...

Pagination

  • First page «
  • Previous page ‹
  • …
  • Page 42
  • Page 43
  • Page 44
  • Page 45
  • Current page 46

Footer menu

  • About CLC
    • Staff
    • Board & Advisors
    • Careers
  • Support Our Work
    • Our Donors
    • Financials
  • Toolkits and Resources
    • DemocracyU
    • Stop Secret Spending
    • Restore Your Vote

Footer Social

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Footer Secondary

  • Contact CLC
  • The Latest
  • Media Center
© Campaign Legal Center 2020

Footer Legal

  • Privacy Policy