The US Supreme court on Monday upheld a law that prevents people from using a driver’s license or ID card to vote in several states and blocked efforts to implement changes to the law passed by Congress after the 2012 presidential election.
The ruling was an affirmation of the importance of the Voting Right Act, which was passed in 1965, and has been a key part of the federal government’s efforts to prevent voter fraud in recent decades.
The Supreme Court also sided with two of the three Democrats on the court who joined the majority opinion, including Chief Justice John Roberts.
The decision came after a year-long battle between the Justice Department and states that sought to block the Voting Power Act, and came just days after the court struck down a federal law that prevented states from restricting early voting.
The decision was an important step toward ensuring that voting rights are protected, said David Weigel, the executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a legal advocacy group that opposed the voting rights act.
“The Voting Rights Acts were passed to protect people of color, women, seniors, the disabled and students from voter suppression,” he said in a statement.
“These laws have proven effective in preventing voting fraud, and it’s a shame that the Trump administration has sought to weaken them.”
The court’s decision could have a major impact on voting rights in the United States, which has seen several major court rulings in recent years, including one in 2014 that struck down restrictions on voting in some parts of the country.
The law, passed in the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling, required states to have voter registration rolls in the public domain and required people to show photo identification to vote.
At issue in the case was the use of photo identification, which many states say is necessary for some people to vote, but the justices said that was not the case in all cases.
For instance, in New York City, the law required anyone who had a driver license or state ID card but had a photo ID, including a birth certificate or a utility bill, to show the document for anyone trying to vote without a photo.
That photo ID was used to cast ballots in more than 200,000 cases, and many counties in New Jersey used it to cast votes in the state’s Democratic primary.
In Alabama, where voting is not required, a state court ruled that a law requiring photo ID for people who had previously voted and had a valid ID card for someone who had not, did not violate the Voting Powers Act.
The state appealed the ruling to the Supreme of the United State, but that ruling is pending.
Other states that have tried to get rid of the voter ID laws include South Carolina, North Carolina, Indiana and Tennessee.
It was the second time the Supreme court has overturned a Voting Rights act, in 2014.
The justices had ruled in a case that struck a law in Texas that restricted early voting, but had not yet ruled in another case that ruled that the Voting Access Act did not protect people with disabilities from discrimination.
More stories about: Elections,elections,government,voting source Google news title This is how much money your government is spending on elections article The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is spending nearly $2 billion on election day operations, according to a report from the watchdog group Common Cause.
Nearly 70 percent of the money, about $1.4 billion, was spent by the Federal Election Board, the agency that oversees elections.
The FEC also is using more than $700 million in funds to buy advertising to reach voters, which is about 5 percent of its overall budget.
Common Cause also said the FEC was spending $200 million to advertise on television and radio during the 2016 presidential election, and that the agency spent $400 million to help swing states vote on the election, including Florida and North Carolina.
While the money spent on advertising was a concern for many groups, including Common Cause, it wasn’t a major issue for the FEC.
As the election approached, the FEC spent less than $100 million on election-related activities, according the report.
However, that’s about one-fifth of the $4.7 billion it spent in total on election activities during the last election cycle.