Weinert v. Commissioner

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that a state “may take action to prevent election fraud without waiting for it to occur and be detected within its own borders”
• explaining that “[t]he standard of review to be applied for a motion to dismiss an indictment is somewhat unclear.”
• finding that bills passed “during different legislative sessions by a substantially different composition of legislators” have sparse “probative value” in showing animus
• suggesting that courts ought to “distinguish between partisan and racial motives” (quotation marks omitted)
• holding, in a Voting Rights Act analysis, that “it should go without saying that a State may take action to prevent election fraud without waiting for it to occur and be detected within its own borders”
• explaining how statistics can be used to make a small difference in outcomes appear larger

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).