Legal Opinion
State of Texas v. Holder
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided August 30, 2012No. Civil Action No. 2012-0128PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TATEL, Circuit Judge.
Pursuant to section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Texas seeks a declaratory judgment that Senate Bill 14 (SB 14), a newly-enacted law requiring in-person voters to present a photo ID, “neither has the purpose nor will have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race[,] color,” or “member[sMp] [in] a language minority group.” 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973c(a), 1973b(f)(2). To satisfy section 5’s effect requirement, Texas must demonstrate that SB 14 will not “lead to a retrogression in the position of racial minorities with respect to their effective…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Elkins v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Harper v. Virginia Board of ElectionsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- South Carolina v. KatzenbachSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Allen v. State Board of ElectionsSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Marc Veasey v. Greg AbbottCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2016
- Veasey v. PerrySupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Veasey v. PerryDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2014
- Frank v. WalkerDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2014
- Veasey v. AbbottCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2015
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.