Zall vs Pennsylvania: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
no edit summary
(BRENG)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{retitle|''{{PAGENAME}}''}}
{{retitle|''{{PAGENAME}}''}}
'''''Zall vs Pennsylvania''''' was a [[Supreme Court]] case in which a woman who had been turned away from a [[polling station]] because she hadn't been able to produce a [[driver's licence|driver's license]] appealed against [[voting|voter]] ID laws.
'''''Zall vs Pennsylvania''''' was a [[Supreme Court]] case in which a woman who had been turned away from a [[polling station]] because she hadn't been able to produce a [[driver's license]] appealed against [[voting|voter]] ID laws.


The [[NAACP]] took up her case, and it went to the Supreme Court, where it was one of the tightest decisions ever: Justices [[Gibbons (Head of State)|Gibbons]] and [[Knox (Head of State)|Knox]] abstained, and with a 4-3 vote, the Court ruled that voter ID laws and laws restricting felons' rights to vote were unconstitutional.
The [[NAACP]] took up her case, and it went to the Supreme Court, where it was one of the tightest decisions ever: Justices [[Gibbons (Head of State)|Gibbons]] and [[Knox (Head of State)|Knox]] abstained, and with a 4-3 vote, the Court ruled that voter ID laws and laws restricting felons' rights to vote were unconstitutional.
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.