Supreme Court conservatives criticize voting rights law

Lawyer Blogs

U.S. Supreme Court conservatives on Wednesday sharply criticized a central part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that is aimed at more than a dozen states with a history of racial discrimination.


It is the second major race case heard by the justices after Barack Obama became the nation's first black president.

The justices seemed split along conservative and liberal lines in considering a provision applying to all or parts of 16 states, mostly in the South. It requires them to get federal government approval before changing their voting procedures.

Congress adopted the Voting Rights Act, an historic piece of U.S. civil rights legislation, to make it easier for millions of blacks and other minorities to exercise their right to vote.

Congress extended it in 2006 for 25 years, with then-President George W. Bush signing it into law.

Last week the justices considered whether race still can be used as a factor for job promotions and hirings, an issue that could affect millions of employers nationwide.

Opponents of the voting rights law argue that the protections for minority voters are no longer needed after more than 40 years of progress, and they cite Obama's election as evidence of how America has changed since 1965.

Related listings

  • Appeals court nominee faces tough questioning

    Appeals court nominee faces tough questioning

    Lawyer Blogs 04/30/2009

    President Barack Obama's choice for a federal appeals court judge came in for rough questioning Wednesday by a Democratic senator over the judge's former affiliation with an advocacy group. At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the nomination of...

  • America's Cup fight heading back to court

    America's Cup fight heading back to court

    Lawyer Blogs 04/29/2009

    America's Cup champion Alinghi of Switzerland is being ordered to tell a New York court why it should not be held in contempt for refusing to comply with an order that its one-on-one showdown against American crew BMW Oracle Racing be held in Februar...

  • Supreme Court OKs regulation of language on TV

    Supreme Court OKs regulation of language on TV

    Lawyer Blogs 04/28/2009

    The Supreme Court is giving tentative approval to government regulation of the use of even a single curse word on live television. But the court, in a 5-4 decision Tuesday, is refusing to pass judgment on whether the Federal Communications Commission...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

St Peters, MO Professional License Attorney Attorney John Lynch has been the go-to choice for many professionals facing administrative sanction. >> read