In a rut on the voting rights act

From Discourse DB
Revision as of 16:24, March 5, 2013 by Yaron Koren (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Item |author=George F. Will, |source=New York Post |date=March 3, 2013 |url=http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/in_rut_on_the_voting_rights_act_Hoo0jhzx4I6K...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an opinion item.

Author(s) George F. Will
Source New York Post
Date March 3, 2013
URL http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/in_rut_on_the_voting_rights_act_Hoo0jhzx4I6KSXXdSEFOIO
Quote
Quotes-start.png Verrilli did not deny that Section 5 takes a toll on federalism. Kennedy, whose vote is apt to be decisive, described the toll disapprovingly as a federal “trusteeship” over the covered states and jurisdictions. Citing the Marshall Plan and other excellent laws that were not necessary forever, Kennedy said: “Times change.” Quotes-end.png


Add or change this opinion item's references


This item argues for the position Supreme Court should strike down section 5 of the Voting Rights Act on the topic Shelby County v. Holder.

Retrieved from "https://discoursedb.org/w/index.php?title=In_a_rut_on_the_voting_rights_act&oldid=16404"