Shelby County v. Holder
E15487
Shelby County v. Holder is a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly weakened the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by striking down the formula used to determine which jurisdictions required federal preclearance for changes to their voting laws.
All labels observed (3)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Shelby County v. Holder canonical | 22 |
| Shelby County v. Holder (2013) | 2 |
| Shelby County v. Holder (dissenting views on voting rights) | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T126056 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
Target entity: Shelby County v. Holder Context triple: [Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, keyCase, Shelby County v. Holder]
-
A.
United States v. Lopez
United States v. Lopez is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that marked the first time in decades the Court struck down a federal law for exceeding Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause, signaling a revival of limits on federal regulatory authority.
-
B.
Craig v. Boren
Craig v. Boren is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that established intermediate scrutiny as the standard for evaluating gender-based classifications under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
C.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Katzenbach v. McClung is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in local restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-
D.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
-
E.
Obergefell v. Hodges
Obergefell v. Hodges is the landmark 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide by ruling that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Target entity: Shelby County v. Holder Target entity description: Shelby County v. Holder is a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly weakened the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by striking down the formula used to determine which jurisdictions required federal preclearance for changes to their voting laws.
-
A.
United States v. Lopez
United States v. Lopez is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that marked the first time in decades the Court struck down a federal law for exceeding Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause, signaling a revival of limits on federal regulatory authority.
-
B.
Cantwell v. Connecticut
Cantwell v. Connecticut is a 1940 U.S. Supreme Court case that first applied the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause to the states, striking down a state law that improperly restricted religious proselytizing.
-
C.
Craig v. Boren
Craig v. Boren is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that established intermediate scrutiny as the standard for evaluating gender-based classifications under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
D.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Katzenbach v. McClung is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in local restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-
E.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
constitutional law case ⓘ voting rights case ⓘ |
| hasAreaOfLaw |
civil rights law
ⓘ
election law ⓘ federalism ⓘ |
| hasArgumentDate | 2013-02-27 ⓘ |
| hasChiefJusticeInMajority |
John G. Roberts Jr.
ⓘ
surface form:
John G. Roberts, Jr.
|
| hasCitation | 570 U.S. 529 ⓘ |
| hasConstitutionalProvisionInvolved |
Article I, Section 4 of the United States Constitution
ⓘ
Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ |
| hasCountry | United States of America ⓘ |
| hasCourt | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| hasDecisionDate | 2013-06-25 ⓘ |
| hasDissentingOpinionBy | Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ |
| hasDocketNumber | No. 12-96 ⓘ |
| hasEffectOnStatute |
invalidated the coverage formula in Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965
ⓘ
rendered Section 5 preclearance inoperative absent a new coverage formula ⓘ |
| hasHolding |
Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional
ⓘ
coverage formula in Section 4(b) exceeds Congress’s power under the Constitution ⓘ |
| hasImpact |
limited the practical operation of the Voting Rights Act’s preclearance regime
ⓘ
significantly weakened federal oversight of changes to state and local voting laws ⓘ |
| hasJusticeInDissent |
Elena Kagan
ⓘ
Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ Sonia Sotomayor ⓘ Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ |
| hasJusticeInMajority |
Anthony M. Kennedy
ⓘ
Antonin Scalia ⓘ Clarence Thomas ⓘ Samuel A. Alito Jr. ⓘ
surface form:
Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
|
| hasKeyConcept |
coverage formula
ⓘ
equal sovereignty of the states ⓘ preclearance ⓘ |
| hasLegalIssue |
constitutionality of Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965
ⓘ
scope of Congress’s enforcement power under the Fifteenth Amendment ⓘ |
| hasLocationOfOriginatingJurisdiction | Shelby County, Alabama ⓘ |
| hasLowerCourt | United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ⓘ |
| hasLowerCourtDecision | upheld the constitutionality of Sections 4(b) and 5 of the Voting Rights Act ⓘ |
| hasMajorityOpinionBy |
John G. Roberts Jr.
ⓘ
surface form:
John G. Roberts, Jr.
|
| hasPetitioner | Shelby County, Alabama ⓘ |
| hasRespondent |
Eric Holder
ⓘ
surface form:
Eric H. Holder, Jr.
United States Attorney General ⓘ |
| hasSectionInvolved |
Voting Rights Act of 1965
ⓘ
surface form:
Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965
Voting Rights Act of 1965 ⓘ
surface form:
Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965
|
| hasStatuteInvolved | Voting Rights Act of 1965 ⓘ |
| hasTerm | October Term 2012 ⓘ |
| hasVoteSplit | 5–4 ⓘ |
| hasYearDecided | 2013 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Subject: Shelby County v. Holder Description of subject: Shelby County v. Holder is a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly weakened the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by striking down the formula used to determine which jurisdictions required federal preclearance for changes to their voting laws.
Referenced by (25)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.