CIR counters move to dismiss voting rights challenge

February 21, 2012

Together with lead counsel Michael Carvin, CIR today filed a brief challenging a last ditch effort by the Department of Justice to prevent the Court of Appeals from ruling on the merits of CIR’s facial challenge to the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.  Earlier this month, the

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

DOJ moves to dismiss LaRoque v. Holder…again

February 14, 2012

The Department of Justice today filed a motion to dismiss LaRoque v. Holder, CIR’s case challenging Section 5 of the Voting Right Act, on grounds that it is moot.  Today’s motion is not unexpected — it follows the Attorney General’s decision on February 10 to purportedly withdraw his 2009 denial of preclearance

Read More → Posted in Case Updates

CIR files brief in ObamaCare challenge

February 13, 2012

Together with former Solicitor General Theodore Olson, CIR filed an amicus brief in Florida v. HHS, now pending before the Supreme Court.  Today’s brief was filed on behalf of a group of former Attorneys General and officials of the Justice Department, including Attorney General John Ashcroft, Attorney General William P. Barr, Assistant Attorney General Timothy

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates, News

DOJ reverses: preclears Kinston nonpartisan voting

February 13, 2012

Late Friday night, the Department of Justice filed with the Court of Appeals a copy of a letter informing Kinston, North Carolina officials that it had reversed its 2009 decision denying preclearance to the nonpartisan voting system passed by voter referendum in 2008.  As noted in the update below, CIR believes

Read More → Posted in Case Updates

AG Holder reconsiders Kinston preclearance

January 30, 2012

Attorney General Eric Holder sent a letter to the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit advising that he is going to reconsider his denial of preclearance for the Kinston nonpartisan voting system on the basis of “new” information he recently received about racial voting patterns in Kinston.  The letter suggests

Read More → Posted in Case Updates

Michigan Supreme Court restores father’s rights

January 27, 2012

Today the Michigan Supreme Court, in the case In re Mays, agreed with CIR and reversed the termination of a Michigan father’s parental rights.  In the trial court that heard the case initially, the termination of the father’s rights had stemmed from the neglectful conduct of the children’s mother; she had left the children home unattended.  At the

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

Guam replies to CIR suit challenging race plebiscite

January 10, 2012

In early December, the Government of Guam moved to dismiss CIR’s case challenging its Chamorro-only plebiscite on grounds that plaintiff Dave Davis cannot possibly have been harmed by being excluded from a plebiscite that is advisory in nature. According to Guam, the plebiscite is intended to solicit the opinion of

Read More → Posted in Case Updates

Setback in voting rights challenge

December 22, 2011

U.S. Federal District Court Judge John Bates issued a ninety-six page opinion today in LaRoque v. Holder,  CIR’s challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The court upheld Section 5 against CIR’s challenge following the reasoning in another recent case, Shelby County v. Holder.  In addition to claims raised in Shelby

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

CIR to appeal voting rights ruling

December 20, 2011

CIR will appeal a ruling today that CIR clients Stephen LaRoque, John Nix, Klay Northrup, Lee Rainor, and Tony Cuomo — individual candidates and referendum sponsors in Kinston, North Carolina — lack standing to challenge the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. According to federal District Judge Bates’s

Read More → Posted in Case Updates

CIR files suit against Guam

November 21, 2011

The Center for Individual Rights filed suit today against Guam, the Guam Election Commission and seven named Guam officials for discrimination on the basis of race and ethnic heritage under Guamanian laws that prohibit individuals who are not “native inhabitants of Guam” from voting on a plebiscite concerning Guam’s future

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates