Shelby V. Holder
Storyboard Text
- Shelby County, 2012
- So, we just need to submit this to Congress before it passes.
- City Resolution V-201215-A
- That can't be right! What about Article 4? This part of the VRA isn't right!
- Shelby County, in 2012, filed a lawsuit to a D.C District Court asking for sections 4b and 5 of the VRA to be ruled unconstitutional, so that counties with historical discrimination didn't have their voting laws overseen by Congress.
- You know, you're right. Give me a sec.
- City Resolution V-201215-A
- Great!
- D.C. District Court
- The Court has ruled these sections of the VRA constitutional, and summary judgement shall be granted to Attorney General Holder
- Shelby county appealed the case, eventually getting to the Supreme Court
- Alright, yes. Let's just hope that SCOTUS sees it differently.
- No, this isn't right, We'll appeal.
- In one of her most powerful dissents, Justice Ginsburg compared this decision to "Putting away your umbrella in a rainstorm, because you aren't getting wet."
- On June 25, 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that the formula being used in Section 4b of the VRA was unconstitutional, because the data was outdated. The existence of a formula was not the problem, it was the age of the formula. This angered many minorities, because they felt it was saying that voter discrimination was acceptable.
- The Court rules in favor of Shelby County, and declares Section 4b of the VRA unconstitutional
- This passed, we just need to send the news to the voting stations.
- Due to the case, and the lack of action from Congress since to make a new formula, all counties are able to pass their own voting restrictions without oversight.
- City Resolution V-201919-A
- Cool, sounds like a plan.
Over 30 Million Storyboards Created