°µºÚ±¬ÁÏ

The Supreme Court struck down a key part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act this week. The court said that the standard by which it is determined that some states need preapproval for making changes to voting laws was unconstitutional. So what does it mean for the Department of Justice and states that were affected by the law? Audie Cornish speaks with Bill Yeomans, law professor at American University.

Voting rights groups and others reacted strongly to Tuesday's Supreme Court ruling that struck down part of the Voting Rights Act. It had required all or part of 15 states to get Justice Department approval for any voting law changes.

The Supreme Court struck down key provisions from the Voting Rights Act. Robert Siegel speaks with NAACP President Ben Jealous about the high court's decision and what it means.

Renee Montagne speaks with NPR's Nina Totenberg about the implications of the Supreme Court's ruling, striking down a key provision of the law.

The U.S. Supreme Court has struck down a key section of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. In a 5-4 decision, the court said the formula used to identify places that need federal election oversight is unconstitutional. For more, David Greene speaks with NPR's Ron Elving and Carrie Johnson.

While the decision does not do away with the landmark law entirely, it rendered an enforcement mechanism moot unless Congress acts.

According to Chief Justice John Roberts, the court will finish its work for the term on Wednesday. So, that's when we'll hear about its decisions on two high-profile cases involving gay rights.

Want to know how the justices decide who writes the big opinions? Or when they decide to release them to the public? What about whether the justices hang out after work? Get your answers here.

The Supreme Court struck down an Arizona law that required proof of citizenship to register to vote. But while celebrating a victory, voting-rights organizations are still waiting for the superstar voting case of the current term: a challenge to the Voting Rights Act.

An inspector general investigation exposed deep fissures within the unit for the past dozen years and gave rise to perceptions of politicized and partial behavior by lawyers there.