Under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, about 800 counties with histories of racially -
discriminatory voting laws — going back to poll taxes and literacy tests — had to get the Justice Department's approval beforehand (a process called pre-clearance) before such laws could take effect.
Not exact matches
The stakes in finding
discriminatory intent are higher because it provides a window for opponents to argue that Texas should be forced to resume having changes to
voting laws «pre-cleared» by the Justice Department or a federal court.
The argument is that VRA is
discriminatory against Southern states to require them but not other states to seek pre-clearance for
voting laws; I actually agree.
After supposedly postponing the conversation, officials jumped the gun on the time line given for the discussion and unveiled their intentions by
voting at the end of November, 6 - 1, to draft a breed
discriminatory spay / neuter
law targeting pit bull terrier like dogs.
The LSUC's benchers
voted to refuse TWU's
law school accreditation in Ontario because of TWU's covenant, which it considered
discriminatory.
The court's order (released today) regards the South Carolina
law as «not [having] a
discriminatory retrogressive effect,» and that the Act «allows citizens with non-photo voter registration cards to still
vote without a photo ID so long as they state the reason for not having obtained one.»
LSUC benchers
voted in April 2014 not to accredit the
law school proposed by TWU, a British Columbia - based evangelical Christian university, because of its community covenant that asks students to refrain from «sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman,» a stipulation critics argue is
discriminatory against LGBTQ individuals.
Earlier rules (eg, those preventing Aboriginal people from
voting or leaving their reserves without permission) have been repealed; other
discriminatory laws are unlikely to be enforced (eg, the Drybones case).
As public positions like these, which are viewed by various groups in society as
discriminatory or hateful, are potentially not only contrary to the Statement of Principles that lawyers will be required to adopt, but also a breach of their existing obligations under the Rules of Professional Conduct, the
Law Society should immediately take steps to investigate and, if necessary, publicly censure the lawyers cited above for their failure to advance the administration of justice by joining other MPs of good will in
voting to condemn the hateful acts of certain members of the public.