Supreme Court conservatives criticize voting rights law
Legal News Center
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
-
Study finds 'massive waste' in misdemeanor cases
Legal News Center 04/29/2009Treating petty, nonviolent misdemeanors as infractions rather than crimes would save millions of dollars and better protect defendants' rights without hurting public safety, according to a study commissioned by criminal defense attorneys. That is the...
-
Court refuses to let officer sue over his arrest
Legal News Center 04/28/2009The Supreme Court has refused to let an Atlantic City, N.J., police officer sue prosecutors and investigators for wrongfully arresting and charging him with the murder of his wife. The high court on Monday refused to hear James L. Andros III's appeal...
-
Court to weigh state's duty to English learners
Legal News Center 04/20/2009The Supreme Court on Monday takes up an Arizona case that could limit a federal court's power to tell states to spend more money to educate students who aren't proficient in English. Arizona state legislators and the state superintendent of public in...
Illinois Work Injury Lawyers – Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD.
Accidents in the workplace are often caused by unsafe work conditions arising from ignoring safety rules, overlooking maintenance or other negligence of those in management. While we are one of the largest firms in Illinois dedicated solely to the representation of injured workers, we pride ourselves on the personal, one-on-one approach we deliver to each client.
Work accidents can cause serious injuries and sometimes permanent damage. Some extremely serious work injuries can permanently hinder a person’s ability to get around and continue their daily duties. Factors that affect one’s quality of life such as place of work, relationships with friends and family, and social standing can all be taken away quickly by a work injury. Although, you may not be able to recover all of your losses, you may be entitled to compensation as a result of your work injury. Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD. provides informed advocacy in all kinds of workers’ compensation claims, including:
• Injuries to the back and neck, including severe spinal cord injuries
• Serious head injuries
• Heart problems resulting from workplace activities
• Injuries to the knees, elbows, shoulders and other joints
• Injuries caused by repetitive movements
For Illinois Workers’ Compensation claims, you will ALWAYS cheat yourself if you do not hire an experienced attorney. When you hire Krol, Bongiorno & Given, Ltd, you will have someone to guide you through the process, and when it is time to settle, we will add value to your case IN EXCESS of our fee. In the last few years, employers and insurance carriers have sought to advance the argument that when you settle a case without an attorney, your already low settlement should be further reduced by 20% so that you do not get a “windfall.” Representing yourself in Illinois is a lose-lose proposition.