Search for: "North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP v. Berger" Results 1 - 20 of 22
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Nov 2021, 3:40 pm by Adam Steinman
North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, which presents the following questions: Whether a state agent authorized by state law to defend the State’s interest in litigation must overcome a... [read post]
The North Carolina State Conference for the NAACP sued the state over SB 824, the voter ID law at issue, which requires voters to present photo ID in order to vote. [read post]
22 Mar 2022, 11:21 am by Michael Gentithes
North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, the discussion seemingly centered around dry procedural minutiae and one of the banes of legal writing courses—the appropriate standard of review to... [read post]
22 Jun 2022, 9:00 pm by Angie Gou
North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, Nance v. [read post]
3 Sep 2021, 4:28 pm by Andrew Hamm
North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP addresses the ability of North Carolina legislators to defend the state’s voter-ID law from lawsuits under the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. [read post]
4 Apr 2022, 9:00 am by DONALD SCARINCI
North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP: The case involves a legal challenge to North Carolina’s voter-identification law, specifically whether two Republican members of the North Carolina legislature should be able to intervene in the suit. [read post]
17 Nov 2021, 10:58 am by John Elwood
North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, 21-248. [read post]
28 Jan 2022, 2:10 pm by Amy Howe
North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP (March 21): Whether Republican legislators who wanted to intervene to defend the North Carolina’s voter ID law were required to show that the state’s interest was not adequately represented by the state’s Democratic attorney general. [read post]
2 Dec 2021, 6:04 am by John Elwood
North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, 21-248, addressing the ability of North Carolina legislators to intervene to defend the state’s voter-ID law from lawsuits under the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. [read post]