28 C.F.R. § 51.44

Notification of decision to object

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

(a) The Attorney General shall within the 60-day period allowed notify the submitting authority of a decision to interpose an objection. The reasons for the decision shall be stated.

(b) The submitting authority shall be advised that the Attorney General will reconsider an objection upon a request by the submitting authority.

(c) The submitting authority shall be advised further that notwithstanding the objection it may institute an action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for a declaratory judgment that the change objected to by the Attorney General neither has the purpose nor will have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority group.

(d) A copy of the notification shall be sent to any party who has commented on the submission or has requested notice of the Attorney General's action thereon.

(e) Notice of the decision to interpose an objection will be given to interested parties registered under § 51.32.

[52 FR 490, Jan. 6, 1987, as amended by Order No. 3262-2011, 76 FR 21247, Apr. 15, 2011]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1985–2014 · leading case: Nat'l Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Hampton Cnty. Election Comm'n, 470 U.S. 166 (1985).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Nat'l Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Hampton Cnty. Election Comm'n, 470 U.S. 166 (1985). “28 CFR § 51.44 (1984). Such a request triggers another 60-day period for the Attorney General to decide whether to continue or withdraw his objection.”

Harris v. Arizona Indep. Redistricting Comm'n, 993 F. Supp. 2d 1042 (D. Ariz. 2014). “Although the Attorney General must state the reasons for interposing an objection, 28 C.F.R. § 51.44 (a), the Commission’s expert witness had no knowledge of the Department of Justice ever denying preclearance for lack of population deviation or otherwise communicating that it…”

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.