- Posted May 21, 2012
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
Washington Appeals court upholds voting rights provision Extensive evidence of racial discrimination found

By Pete Yost
Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal appeals court on Friday upheld a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, rejecting an Alabama county's challenge to the landmark civil rights law.
The provision requires state, county and local governments with a history of discrimination to obtain advance approval from the Justice Department, or from a federal court in Washington, for any changes to election procedures. It now applies to all or parts of 16 states.
In a 2-1 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said that Congress developed extensive evidence of continuing racial discrimination just six years ago and reached a reasonable conclusion when it reauthorized section 5 of the law at that time.
Judge David Tatel wrote for the majority that the court owes deference to Congress' judgment on the matter.
In dissent, Judge Stephen Williams said the Voting Rights Act "imposes rather extraordinary burdens" based on information about discrimination that is several decades old.
Section 5 currently applies to the states of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.
It also covers certain counties in California, Florida, New York, North Carolina and South Dakota, as well as some local jurisdictions in Michigan and New Hampshire.
Published: Mon, May 21, 2012
headlines Detroit
headlines National
- This LA lawyer levels up legal protections in the video game industry
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- Legal champions to receive Spirit of Excellence Award at 2026 ABA Midyear Meeting
- Fake Sullivan & Cromwell entities used by scammers should be dissolved, suit says
- Hackers gained access to ‘small number’ of attorney emails at Williams & Connolly, firm confirms
- Before joining Anderson Kill, judge was accused of rude behavior on bench, retaliatory threats in ethics case