Legal Opinion
State of Texas v. Holder
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided August 11, 2014No. Civil Action No. 2012-0128PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ROSEMARY M. COLLYER, United States District Judge
In 2012, the U.S. Attorney General and thirty-one DefendanL-Intervenors chai- lenged Texas’s proposed voter identification law and momentarily prevailed before a three-judge panel. Defendanb-Interve-nors now seek an award of attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs, despite the subsequent vacatur of the three-judge panel’s opinion by the Supreme Court. This Court previously decided a similar case, Texas v. United States, which awarded attorneys’ fees to Defendant-Intervenors who successfully challenged Texas’s redistricting maps in Voting…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Gisbrecht v. BarnhartSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Human ResourcesSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Farrar v. HobbySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Douglas v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- Infusino v. DevosDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2022