Final answer:
In Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the Supreme Court deemed a key part of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional, impacting the enforcement of federal oversight on voting law changes in jurisdictions with a history of discrimination.
Step-by-step explanation:
The Supreme Court ruled that a key section of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional in the case of Shelby County v. Holder (2013). This decision invalidated the coverage formula used to determine which jurisdictions were subjected to preclearance before they could change their voting laws, as outlined in Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The preclearance requirement was designed to prevent discriminatory practices in places with a history of voting discrimination. The Supreme Court’s ruling effectively shifted the responsibility for overseeing voting regulations back to these states, some of which quickly passed laws that imposed new restrictions on voters' rights and access. Critics viewed this as a significant setback for civil rights, while supporters heralded it as a victory for states' rights.