Judge raises questions about Voting Rights Act
Court Alerts
A federal judge on Wednesday questioned whether a key component of the landmark Voting Rights Act is outdated, expressing skepticism about using evidence of racial discrimination from 40 or 50 years ago to justify continued election monitoring for a group of mostly Southern states.
U.S. District Judge John Bates' comments came during oral arguments in an Alabama county's lawsuit targeting the law — a constitutional challenge that a number of legal observers predict could well reach the Supreme Court.
Shelby County, backed by conservative legal groups, maintains that it and other covered state, county and local governments should no longer be forced to get federal approval before changing even minor election procedures. They note that the Voting Rights Act — enacted in 1965 and extended by Congress for another 25 years in 2006 — relies heavily on past discrimination in determining which jurisdictions are covered by the "pre-clearance" requirement for election changes, such as moving a polling place or redrawing school district lines.
Bates posed sharp questions to the legal teams on both sides but at times appeared sympathetic to the county's argument.
Related listings
-
Trenton voids law firm contract for contributions
Court Alerts 02/02/2011Trenton's city attorney has found pay-to-play problems with a $50,000 contract that the city recently awarded to an Atlantic City law firm with ties to Mayor Tony Mack.Acting Law Director Marc McKithen voided the contract because he says Cooper Leven...
-
Court puts Emanuel back in Chicago mayor's race
Court Alerts 01/28/2011With Rahm Emanuel back in the race for Chicago mayor thanks to a ruling from Illinois' highest court, the question now is what effect the legal dispute had on the race.A lower court threw the former White House chief of staff off the ballot earlier i...
-
Court revives N. Calif. town's pollution lawsuit
Court Alerts 01/28/2011An appeals court revived a class-action lawsuit Thursday for 160 residents of a Northern California town who claim an industrial plant's pollution severely sickened them. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled a trial judge was wrong to dismiss ...
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.