C.F.R. » Title 28 » CHAPTER I—DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE › PART 51—PROCEDURES FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF SECTION 5 OF THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965, AS AMENDED › Subpart E—Processing of Submissions

28 C.F.R. § 51.35

Disposition of inappropriate submissions and resubmissions

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) When the Attorney General determines that a response on the merits of a submitted change is inappropriate, the Attorney General shall notify the submitting official in writing within the 60-day period that would have commenced for a determination on the merits and shall include an explanation of the reason why a response is not appropriate.

(b) Matters that are not appropriate for a merits response include:

(1) Changes that do not affect voting (see § 51.13);

(2) Standards, practices, or procedures that have not been changed (see §§ 51.4, 51.14);

(3) Changes that previously have received preclearance;

(4) Changes that affect voting but are not subject to the requirement of section 5 (see § 51.18);

(5) Changes that have been superseded or for which a determination is premature (see §§ 51.22, 51.61(b));

(6) Submissions by jurisdictions not subject to the preclearance requirement (see §§ 51.4, 51.5);

(7) Submissions by an inappropriate or unauthorized party or jurisdiction (see § 51.23); and

(8) Deficient submissions (see § 51.26(d)).

(c) Following such a notification by the Attorney General, a change shall be deemed resubmitted for section 5 review upon the Attorney General's receipt of a submission or other written information that renders the change appropriate for review on the merits (such as a notification from the submitting authority that a change previously determined to be premature has been formally adopted). Notice of the resubmission of a change affecting voting will be given to interested parties registered under § 51.32.

[Order No. 3262-2011, 76 FR 21246, Apr. 15, 2011]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1983–1993 · leading case: Dupree v. Moore, 831 F. Supp. 1310 (S.D. Miss. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dupree v. Moore, 831 F. Supp. 1310 (S.D. Miss. 1993). · cites it 2× “Because Federal Regulations require that the United States Attorney General request additional information or offer objections to a submission for preclearance within 60 days, 28 C.F.R. § 51.35 (1986), now 28 C.F.R. 51.”
Greenville Sch. v. W. Line Sch., 575 So. 2d 956 (Miss. 1991). “In addition, in 1986, 28 C.F.R. § 51.35 (7-1-86 Edition) governed the Attorney General's authority to request additional information from submitting jurisdictions.”
Dupree v. Mabus, 776 F. Supp. 290 (S.D. Miss. 1991). “28 C.F.R. § 51.35 (1986). The USAG did not make such a request.”
Lucas v. Bolivar Cnty., Mississippi, 567 F. Supp. 433 (N.D. Miss. 1983). “28 C.F.R. § 51.35 (a). Thus, the Attorney General’s request was timely, and defendants do not contend to the contrary.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.