If the immediate hours and months after Shelby County v. Holder (2013) brought a litany of suppressive measures, what happened in the decade since? In North Carolina, Republicans have spent the last 10 years making it harder to vote.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a South Carolina racial gerrymandering case next term. Trial testimony reveals intentional weakening of Black voting strength, an opaque redistricting process and a culture of unresponsiveness.
How the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Allen v. Milligan Will Impact Ongoing Redistricting Litigation
The U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Allen v. Milligan will have a reverberating impact on active litigation involving Section 2 claims across 10 different states.
The majority upheld Section 2 of the Voting Rights and its current application, a victory for voting rights and for Black Alabamians who will have the opportunity to elect the candidates of their choice.
Throughout his time in the governor’s office, he’s been more than willing to restrict voting and indulge conspiratorial thinking about elections.
On Monday, May 15, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it will hear a racial gerrymandering case out of South Carolina next term.
The fact that a small city’s redistricting skirmish led to the gutting of a central portion of the federal Voting Rights Act should serve as a reminder to not overlook local redistricting.
The ruling will allow Republicans to cement their power in a purple state. The reversal also complicates a pending U.S. Supreme Court Case, Moore v. Harper, which could have implications nationally.
After Rucho v. Common Cause (2019), state courts have been put to the test: Can they protect voters from partisan gerrymandering? Now, there are more maps, more lawsuits and slowly but surely, more rulings.
Litigation in North Carolina is perhaps most notable for being the current source of efforts to get the U.S. Supreme Court to endorse the fringe independent state legislature (ISL) theory.