The Voting Rights Act After Shelby County v. Holder: A Potential Fix to Revive Section 5
The passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) was a momentous occasion for minority voters in the United States, and its positive effects could be measured immediately. However, when Section 4 of the VRA was declared unconstitutional in Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the ability of the VRA to...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN FR |
| Publicado: |
Association Française d'Etudes Américaines
2016
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/e796ab2c84f743c0aeb3de6db45e67e2 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| id |
oai:doaj.org-article:e796ab2c84f743c0aeb3de6db45e67e2 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
oai:doaj.org-article:e796ab2c84f743c0aeb3de6db45e67e22021-12-02T10:15:19ZThe Voting Rights Act After Shelby County v. Holder: A Potential Fix to Revive Section 51765-276610.4000/transatlantica.7429https://doaj.org/article/e796ab2c84f743c0aeb3de6db45e67e22016-01-01T00:00:00Zhttp://journals.openedition.org/transatlantica/7429https://doaj.org/toc/1765-2766The passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) was a momentous occasion for minority voters in the United States, and its positive effects could be measured immediately. However, when Section 4 of the VRA was declared unconstitutional in Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the ability of the VRA to continue its protection of minority voters was called into question. We argue that the VRA is still necessary and propose an administrative notification system that could fix the issues with Sections 4 and 5.Thomas L. BrunellWhitney Ross ManzoAssociation Française d'Etudes AméricainesarticleHistory AmericaE-FAmericaE11-143ENFRTransatlantica : Revue d'Études Américaines, Vol 1 (2016) |
| institution |
DOAJ |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| language |
EN FR |
| topic |
History America E-F America E11-143 |
| spellingShingle |
History America E-F America E11-143 Thomas L. Brunell Whitney Ross Manzo The Voting Rights Act After Shelby County v. Holder: A Potential Fix to Revive Section 5 |
| description |
The passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) was a momentous occasion for minority voters in the United States, and its positive effects could be measured immediately. However, when Section 4 of the VRA was declared unconstitutional in Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the ability of the VRA to continue its protection of minority voters was called into question. We argue that the VRA is still necessary and propose an administrative notification system that could fix the issues with Sections 4 and 5. |
| format |
article |
| author |
Thomas L. Brunell Whitney Ross Manzo |
| author_facet |
Thomas L. Brunell Whitney Ross Manzo |
| author_sort |
Thomas L. Brunell |
| title |
The Voting Rights Act After Shelby County v. Holder: A Potential Fix to Revive Section 5 |
| title_short |
The Voting Rights Act After Shelby County v. Holder: A Potential Fix to Revive Section 5 |
| title_full |
The Voting Rights Act After Shelby County v. Holder: A Potential Fix to Revive Section 5 |
| title_fullStr |
The Voting Rights Act After Shelby County v. Holder: A Potential Fix to Revive Section 5 |
| title_full_unstemmed |
The Voting Rights Act After Shelby County v. Holder: A Potential Fix to Revive Section 5 |
| title_sort |
voting rights act after shelby county v. holder: a potential fix to revive section 5 |
| publisher |
Association Française d'Etudes Américaines |
| publishDate |
2016 |
| url |
https://doaj.org/article/e796ab2c84f743c0aeb3de6db45e67e2 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT thomaslbrunell thevotingrightsactaftershelbycountyvholderapotentialfixtorevivesection5 AT whitneyrossmanzo thevotingrightsactaftershelbycountyvholderapotentialfixtorevivesection5 AT thomaslbrunell votingrightsactaftershelbycountyvholderapotentialfixtorevivesection5 AT whitneyrossmanzo votingrightsactaftershelbycountyvholderapotentialfixtorevivesection5 |
| _version_ |
1718397491107332096 |