Document Type

Article

Publication Date

Winter 2016

Publication Source

Oklahoma Law Review

Abstract

In Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court struck down a key aspect of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 based on “the principle that all States enjoy equal sovereignty.” Legal scholars have exhaustively attacked Shelby County’s equal sovereignty principle with a surprising degree of unanimity and contempt. These critics argue that the principle is theoretically unworkable, finds no support in the Supreme Court’s precedent, is inconsistent with constitutional history, undermines individual rights, and is tainted by its association with slavery and Jim Crow. This Article responds to such criticism by arguing that the principle of equal sovereignty is a coherent and defensible legal doctrine that is deeply rooted in our nation’s constitutional history.

Inclusive pages

209-262

ISBN/ISSN

0030-1752

Document Version

Published Version

Comments

Document is made available for download in compliance with the publisher's policy on self-archiving. Link to article on publisher's website.

Permission documentation is on file.

Publisher

University of Oklahoma College of Law

Volume

68

Issue

2

Volume

68

Issue

2

Peer Reviewed

yes


Share

COinS