• gAlienLifeform@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    If memory serves, Shelby was just about the ability of the DOJ to require states from the former Confederacy to get DOJ’s approval before making any changes to their election laws, where this is about DOJ’s ability to monitor any state’s actual implementation of their election laws

    Either way, illegitimate decision from an illegitimate court that wouldn’t have any precedential value if we lived in a decent country, but yeah, back in the one we actually live in who knows what is and isn’t legal anymore.

    e; DOJs? I’m pretty sure there’s just the one, autocorrect

    • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      If memory serves, Shelby was just about the ability of the DOJ to require states from the former Confederacy to get DOJ’s approval before making any changes to their election laws, where this is about DOJ’s ability to monitor any state’s actual implementation of their election laws

      This is quite incorrect. I would read the link I provided.