South Carolina v. Katzenbach

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 sought to eliminate racial discrimination in voting. In addition to regulations applicable to all states, the act contained certain more stringent regulations applicable to states in which voting discrimination was most prolific. The more stringent regulations applied to states that both (1) used a test as a prerequisite to voter registration and (2) had fewer than 50 percent of eligible voters registered to vote as of November 1, 1964 (the coverage provision). In impacted states, no person could be denied the right to vote for failing to comply with a test for five years from the last occurrence of substantial voting discrimination, essentially requiring a suspension of voter-qualification tests (the suspension-of-tests provision). Also, the states could not adopt new voting laws without first submitting them to the attorney general or a federal court for approval (the preclearance provision). Finally, the attorney general could appoint federal examiners to identify and register qualified voters who would thereafter be entitled to vote in all elections (the examiner provision). South Carolina (plaintiff), a state subject to the more stringent regulations, filed a complaint against Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach (defendant) seeking a declaratory judgment that the provisions exceeded the scope of congressional legislative authority. The United States Supreme Court assumed original jurisdiction because the case presented a controversy between a state and a citizen of another state.