Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Friday that roughly 98,000 Arizonans whose voter registration status was in limbo will be able to participate in the full ballot in November.
From an Arizona State Supreme Court ruling that can impact over 90,000 voters come November to the latest chapter in the Chad Daybell saga, here's a look at some of our top stories.
The recent US Supreme Court decision changing voter registration rules in Arizona has voting rights advocates anxious about how the justices will approach emergency election appeals in the runup ...
Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. 529 (2013), is a landmark decision [1] of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the constitutionality of two provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965: Section 5, which requires certain states and local governments to obtain federal preclearance before implementing any changes to their voting laws or practices; and subsection (b) of Section 4 ...
Following the US Supreme Court ruling in the case of Shelby County v. Holder, (2013), suspending the provision for pre-clearance, the state attorney general believed the voter ID law could be implemented in 2014. [224] The state of Alabama issues free voter ID cards to voters who need them. [225]
Chiafalo v. Washington, 591 U.S. 578 (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case on the issue of "faithless electors" in the Electoral College stemming from the 2016 United States presidential election. The Court ruled unanimously, by a vote of 9–0, that states have the ability to enforce an elector's pledge in presidential elections.
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, allowed Arizona to enforce, for now, a 2022 law that bans someone from voting in state elections without showing proof of citizenship while ...
Laws applied. U.S. Const. amend. XIV; Indiana Public Law 109-2005 (SEA 483) Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that an Indiana law requiring voters to provide photographic identification did not violate the United States Constitution. [1]