U.S. Code » Title 42 » Chapter CHAPTER 146— ELECTION ADMINISTRATION IMPROVEMENT › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER II— COMMISSION › Part Part A— Establishment and General Organization › Subpart subpart 1— election assistance commission

42 U.S.C. § 15321

Transferred

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar

[transferred]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 2004–2013 · leading case: Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc., 133 S. Ct. 2247 (2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc., 133 S. Ct. 2247 (2013). · cites it 2× “I In 2002, Congress created the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), 42 U. S. C. §15321 et seq., and gave it the ongoing responsibility of “develop[ing] a mail voter registration application form for elections for Federal office” “in consultation with the chief election…”
Jesus Gonzalez v. State of Arizona, 677 F.3d 383 (9th Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “1666, it created the EAC, 42 U.S.C. § 15321 , which eventually absorbed the FEC’s duties under the NVRA, see 42 U.”
Maria Gonzalez v. State of Arizona, 624 F.3d 1162 (9th Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “1666, in 2002, it cre- ated the EAC, 42 U.S.C. § 15321 , which eventually absorbed the FEC’s duties under the NVRA.”
Bay Cnty. Democratic Party v. Land, 347 F. Supp. 2d 404 (E.D. Mich. 2004). “” Section 202, 42 U.S.C. § 15321 . This commission conducts studies and issues reports as part of its mandate.”
Edelman v. State, 160 Wash. App. 294 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “See 42 U.S.C. §§ 15321 , 15322. The EAC provides voluntary guidance to assist states in meeting the HAVA requirements.”
Gonzalez v. Arizona, 649 F.3d 953 (9th Cir. 2010). “1666, in 2002, it created the EAC, 42 U.S.C. § 15321 , which eventually absorbed the FEC's duties under the NVRA.”
Edelman v. State, 248 P.3d 581 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “See 42 U.S.C. §§ 15321 , 15322. The EAC provides voluntary guidance to assist states in meeting the HAVA requirements.”
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.