Skip to main content

Happy Law Day!

By
Today is the 53rd annual U.S. Law Day, a day set aside to celebrate the rule of law. Though not a government holiday, Law Day was declared by President Eisenhower in 1958, and in 1961 became Public Law 87-20, codified at 36 U.S.C. 113. Every year on Law Day the President makes a proclamation inviting the nation to celebrate the importance of our Nation's legal and judicial systems.

Each law day is given a theme by the American Bar Association, and for Law Day 2014 it’s “ American Democracy and the Rule of Law: Why Every Vote Matters,” celebrating the coming 50th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. This year’s efforts focus on the importance of voting and of ensuring that our nation’s election laws and practices permit the broadest, least restrictive access to the ballot box.

There are no specific voter qualifications contained within the text of the Constitution. The Framers left that topic up to the states. For this reason, Amendments guaranteeing the right of women and African American men to vote are not phrased as grants of the right to vote, but instead as prohibitions on preventing individuals from voting because of their race or sex.

·         In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law. The landmark legislation tackled discriminatory voting restrictions head-on. Jurisdictions with a history of discrimination were required to get federal preclearance before enacting new voting procedures. Restrictions that had the impact of disenfranchising voters on the basis of race were prohibited.


·         In June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Shelby County v. Holder that the Voting Rights Act’s key provision, which required several states to receive preclearance from the federal government before  implementing voting changes, was invalid. The Court reasoned that the formula used to determine which jurisdictions were subject to preclearance because they had a history of discrimination was out of date.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Amazing, but True, Deportation Story of Carlos Marcello

By
Earlier this week, the University of Houston Law Center was fortunate to have as its guest Professor Daniel Kanstroom of Boston College of Law. An expert in immigration law, he is the Director of the International Human Rights Program, and he both founded and directs the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic. Speaking as the guest of the Houston Journal of International Law’s annual Fall Lecture Series, Professor Kanstroom discussed issues raised in his new book, Aftermath: Deportation Law and the New American Diaspora . Professor Michael Olivas introduced Professor Kanstroom to the audience, and mentioned the fascinating tale of Carlos Marcello, which Professor Kanstroom wrote about in his chapter “The Long, Complex, and Futile Deportation Saga of Carlos Marcello,” in Immigration Stories , a collection of narratives about leading immigration law cases. My interest piqued, I read and was amazed by Kanstroom’s description of one of the most interesting figures in American le
1 comment
Read more

C-SPAN Video Archive Now Online

By
Legislative researchers and politics fans take note. C-SPAN recently completed a digitization project placing the entirety of its video collection online. The archives record all three C-SPAN networks seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. The videos are available at no cost for historical, educational, research, and archival uses. The database includes over 160,000 hours of video recorded since 1987 and the programs are indexed by subject, speaker names, titles, affiliations, sponsors, committees, categories, formats, policy groups, keywords, and locations. The most recent, most watched, and most shared videos are highlighted on the main page. To start watching, visit the C-SPAN Video Library and use the search function at the top of the page.
Post a Comment
Read more

Texas Subsequent History Table Ceases Publication

By
This week, Thomson Reuters notified subscribers that publication of the Texas Subsequent History Table will be discontinued and no further updates will be produced, due to “insufficient market interest.” Practitioners have been extracting writ (and since 1997, petition) history from the tables since their initial publication in 1917 as The Complete Texas Writs of Error Table . The tables, later published by West, have been used for nearly a century to determine how the Texas Supreme Court or Court of Criminal Appeals disposed of an appeal from an intermediate appellate court. The purpose of adding this notation to citations is to indicate the effect of the Texas Supreme Court’s action on the weight of authority of the Court of Appeals’ opinion.  For example, practitioners may prefer to use as authority a case that the Texas Supreme Court has determined is correct both in result and legal principles applied (petition refused), rather than one that simply presents no error that requires
Post a Comment
Read more