Legal Opinion
State of New Hampshire v. Holder
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided March 1, 2013No. Civil Action No. 2012-1854PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THREE-JUDGE COURT
This case is before the Court on Proposed Intervenor Peter Heilemann’s Motion to Intervene. Movant seeks to intervene as of right under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a) or, in the alternative, to intervene permissively under Rule 24(b). For the reasons explained below, the motion will be DENIED.
I. BACKGROUND
Congress enacted the Voting Rights Act in 1965 to “rid the country of racial discrimination in voting.” South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 301, 315, 86 S.Ct. 803, 15 L.Ed.2d 769 (1966). Section 5 of the Act requires certain “covered…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Allen v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Summers v. Earth Island InstituteSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Keepseagle v. VilsackDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- Alley Cat Allies Incorporated v. United States National Park ServiceDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2026
- Commonwealth of Virginia v. FerrieroDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2021
- Keeps Eagle v. VenemanDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- State of California v. Donald J. TrumpDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2020