publication . Article . 2014

Free at Last: Rejecting Equal Sovereignty and Restoring the Constitutional Right to Vote: Shelby County v. Holder

James Uriah Blacksher; Lani Guinier;
Open Access English
  • Published: 01 Jan 2014
  • Publisher: Harvard University, Harvard Law School
  • Country: United States
Abstract
The "equal sovereignty" principle the Supreme Court majority relied on in Shelby County v. Holder to strike down the coverage formula in Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act is rooted in the jurisprudence of slavery. In the infamous 1857 case of Dred Scott v. Sandford, Chief Justice Roger Taney held that black Americans, slave or free, were not members of the sovereign people and could never be "citizens" within the meaning of the Constitution. Otherwise, he said, blacks would be entitled to all the fundamental rights of citizenship guaranteed by the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, Section 2, including the right to vote, a result that would violate...
Subjects
free text keywords: Privileges and Immunities Clause, Privileges or Immunities Clause, Substantive due process, Political science, Constitutional right, Law, Supreme court, Equal Protection Clause, Fundamental rights, Dormant Commerce Clause, Public administration
Powered by OpenAIRE Open Research Graph
Any information missing or wrong?Report an Issue
publication . Article . 2014

Free at Last: Rejecting Equal Sovereignty and Restoring the Constitutional Right to Vote: Shelby County v. Holder

James Uriah Blacksher; Lani Guinier;