52 U.S.C. § 10310

Enforcement proceedings

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 52 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Criminal contempt

All cases of criminal contempt arising under the provisions of chapters 103 to 107 of this title shall be governed by section 1995 of title 42.

(b) Jurisdiction of courts for declaratory judgment, restraining orders, or temporary or permanent injunction

No court other than the District Court for the District of Columbia shall have jurisdiction to issue any declaratory judgment pursuant to section 10303 or 10304 of this title or any restraining order or temporary or permanent injunction against the execution or enforcement of any provision of chapters 103 to 107 of this title or any action of any Federal officer or employee pursuant hereto.

(c) Definitions(1) The terms “vote” or “voting” shall include all action necessary to make a vote effective in any primary, special, or general election, including, but not limited to, registration, listing pursuant to this chapter, or other action required by law prerequisite to voting, casting a ballot, and having such ballot counted properly and included in the appropriate totals of votes cast with respect to candidates for public or party office and propositions for which votes are received in an election.(2) The term “political subdivision” shall mean any county or parish, except that where registration for voting is not conducted under the supervision of a county or parish, the term shall include any other subdivision of a State which conducts registration for voting.(3) The term “language minorities” or “language minority group” means persons who are American Indian, Asian American, Alaskan Natives or of Spanish heritage.(d) Subpenas

In any action for a declaratory judgment brought pursuant to section 10303 or 10304 of this title, subpenas for witnesses who are required to attend the District Court for the District of Columbia may be served in any judicial district of the United States: Provided, That no writ of subpena shall issue for witnesses without the District of Columbia at a greater distance than one hundred miles from the place of holding court without the permission of the District Court for the District of Columbia being first had upon proper application and cause shown.

(e) Attorney’s fees

In any action or proceeding to enforce the voting guarantees of the fourteenth or fifteenth amendment, the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney’s fee, reasonable expert fees, and other reasonable litigation expenses as part of the costs.

(Pub. L. 89–110, title I, § 14, Aug. 6, 1965, 79 Stat. 445; renumbered title I, Pub. L. 91–285, § 2, June 22, 1970, 84 Stat. 314; amended Pub. L. 94–73, title II, § 207, title IV, § 402, Aug. 6, 1975, 89 Stat. 402, 404; Pub. L. 109–246, §§ 3(e)(3), 6, July 27, 2006, 120 Stat. 580, 581.)Editorial NotesCodification

Section was formerly classified to section 1973l of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

Amendments

2006—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 109–246, § 3(e)(3), struck out “or a court of appeals in any proceeding under section 1973g of this title” after “District of Columbia”.

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 109–246, § 6, inserted “, reasonable expert fees, and other reasonable litigation expenses” after “reasonable attorney’s fee”.

1975—Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 94–73, § 207, added par. (3).

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 94–73, § 402, added subsec. (e).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 51 cases (28 in the last 5 years), 2015–2025 · leading case: Shelby Cnty., Alabama v. Loretta E. Lynch, 799 F.3d 1173 (D.C. Cir. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Shelby Cnty., Alabama v. Loretta E. Lynch, 799 F.3d 1173 (D.C. Cir. 2015). · cites it 10× “8 52 U.S.C. § 10310 (e). 1 Shelby County insisted that it had prevailed in an “action or proceeding to enforce the voting guarantees” of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments (which, for ease of reference, we shall term the Reconstruction Amendments) and so should receive fees…”

David Brat v. Gloria Personhuballah, 883 F.3d 475 (4th Cir. 2018). · cites it 7× “§ 1988 (b) and 52 U.S.C. § 10310 (e), when the intervening defendants were not charged with any wrongdoing and could not be held liable for the relief that the plaintiffs sought.”

Brandon v. Guilford Cnty. Bd. of Elections, 921 F.3d 194 (4th Cir. 2019). · cites it 5× “§ 1988 and 52 U.S.C. § 10310 (e). The district court denied their motion, however, concluding that “special circumstances” justified the denial of fees because the County Board, even though responsible for enforcing the unconstitutional law, had no hand in enacting the law and…”

Veasey v. Abbott, 13 F.4th 362 (5th Cir. 2021). · cites it 3× “§ 1988 (b) and 52 U.S.C. § 10310 (e). It seems obvious that they are.”

OCA-Greater Houston v. Texas, 867 F.3d 604 (5th Cir. 2017). “The word “vote” is expressly defined in 52 U.S.C. § 10310 (c)(1) (formerly 42 U.S.”

State of Texas v. United States, 798 F.3d 1108 (D.C. Cir. 2015). · cites it 2× “” 52 U.S.C. § 10310 (e). Factual and Procedural Background Following the 2010 census, the Texas Legislature enacted redistricting plans for the Texas House of Representatives, the Texas Senate, and the United States House of Representatives.”

Vaughan v. Lewisville Indep Sch Dist, 62 F.4th 199 (5th Cir. 2023). · cites it 2× “The district court then granted defendants’ motion for sanctions against Vaughan, his attorneys, and their law firm based on the findings that Vaughan’s lawsuit was frivolous under 52 U.S.C. § 10310 (e) and his attorneys multiplied proceedings unreasonably and vexatiously under…”

M. R. v. Ridley Sch. Dist., 868 F.3d 218 (3rd Cir. 2017). “§ 12205 (Americans with Disabilities Act); 52 U.S.C. § 10310 (e) (Voting Rights Act of 1965).”

Allen v. Milligan, 599 U.S. 1 (2023). “” Post, at 47 (quoting 52 U. S. C. § 10310 (c)(1); emphasis added).”

Jan Rath v. Veronika Marcoski, 898 F.3d 1306 (11th Cir. 2018). “§ 794a(b) ; Voting Rights Act of 1965, 52 U.S.C. § 10310 (e). Generally, the prevailing party "bears the burden of establishing entitlement" to a fee award and proving the reasonableness of the requested fees.”

Joseph Thomas v. Tate Reeves, 961 F.3d 800 (5th Cir. 2020). “See 52 U.S.C. § 10310 (e). But it applies only in an “action or proceeding to enforce the voting guarantees of the fourteenth or fifteenth amendment .”

Arnold Davis v. Guam, 785 F.3d 1311 (9th Cir. 2015). · cites it 2× “” See 52 U.S.C. § 10310 (c). Davis does not allege the plebiscite will change Guam’s Constitution.”

Show all 51 citing cases →

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.