Case Status: Loss.
Nix v. Holder: Chronology
Court Declines to Review Voting Rights Case
On November 12, 2012, the Supreme Court denied CIR’s petition for a writ of certiorari in Nix v. Holder.
CIR asks Court to review Kinston, NC case
Together with lead counsel Michael Carvin, CIR filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in Nix et al. v. Holder, its case challenging the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
CIR counters move to dismiss voting rights challenge
Together with lead counsel Michael Carvin, CIR 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.
DOJ moves to dismiss LaRoque v. Holder…again
The Department of Justice 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.
DOJ reverses: preclears Kinston nonpartisan voting
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.
AG Holder reconsiders Kinston preclearance
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.
Setback in voting rights challenge
U.S. Federal District Court Judge John Bates issued a ninety-six page opinion 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.
CIR to appeal voting rights ruling
CIR will appeal a ruling 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.
District Court hears oral argument in voting rights case
A judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia heard oral argument in CIR’s historic challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
Court grants standing in voting rights challenge
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a decision holding that CIR plaintiffs Stephen LaRoque, John Nix and others have standing to pursue their challenge of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
CIR files motion for expedited appeal
CIR filed a motion for expedited review of Judge Bates’ December 20 ruling dismissing CIR’s challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
CIR to appeal voting rights ruling
CIR decided to appeal a ruling 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.
Court sets hearing date, further schedule in Section 5 challenge
U.S District Judge John D. Bates set December 3, 2010, as the date he will hear the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss Laroque v. Holder, CIR’s lawsuit challenging Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The judge wrote that he expects to “resolve the motion promptly thereafter.”
Wait — hurry up
U.S. District Court Judge John D. Bates stayed LaRoque v. Holder, CIR’s challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Proceedings — including consideration of our motion for summary judgment — are stayed until the court decides the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the case.
CIR moves for summary judgment in voting rights case
Lead Counsel Michael Carvin filed a motion for summary judgment in CIR’s case on behalf of citizens of Kinston, North Carolina, in which we ask the court to strike down Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act as unconstitutional.
NC NAACP seeks to intervene in voting rights case
The North Carolina State Conference of Branches of the NAACP and several Kinston, NC residents moved to intervene as defendants in LaRoque v. Holder, CIR’s case challenging Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
CIR files reply brief in voting rights case
CIR filed papers responding to the Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss CIR’s case challenging Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, LaRoque v. Holder.
Judge Bates denies motion for three-judge panel
U.S. District Court Judge John Bates released a memorandum opinion denying CIR’s motion to have LaRoque v. Holder heard by a special three-judge panel.
CIR argues for three-judge court in LaRoque v. Holder
Lead counsel Michael Carvin filed a reply to the Department of Justice’s objection to a three-judge court being appointed to hear CIR’s challenge to the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, LaRoque v. Holder.
Related Section 5 challenge filed by Shelby County, AL
Shelby County, Alabama, filed a challenge to the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act and asked that it be deemed a “related case” to LaRoque v. Holder, CIR’s constitutional challenge filed on April 7.
CIR files challenge to federal voting rights law
CIR filed suit against Attorney General Eric Holder and in so doing challenged the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.