2021-09-152021-09-152013Angelica Rolong, Access Denied: Why the Supreme Court's Decision in Shelby County v. Holder May Disenfranchise Texas Minority Voters, 46 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 519 (2013-2014)https://hdl.handle.net/2346/87937Aims to address SB 14's faults, and the more important issue of the need for judicial or executive oversight for potential statutory electoral changes. Part II of this Comment introduces a historical perspective of the events that led to the VRA's enactment. Part III introduces § 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the requirements of § 5, and the other sections in the statute relevant to this issue. Part IV considers SB 14, its path through the Department of Justice and the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, and its eventual enactment. Part V traces the history of the VRA's various reauthorizations and a judicial history of § 5, including the Court's historical affirmation of the measure's constitutionality.engTale of Silvia Citizen and the lost voteCivil rights movementSection 5 of the Voting Rights ActSection 5's preclearance requirementStrict voter identificationSenate Bill 14South Carolina v. KatzenbachBeer v. United StatesCity of Rome v. United StatesCongruence and proportionality testCity of Boerne v. FloresLopez v. Monterey CountyNorthwest Austin Municipal Utility District v. HolderShelby County v. HolderSovereignty of statesVoter discriminationArticle