Latest news with #LaCour
Winnipeg Free Press
29-07-2025
- Politics
- Winnipeg Free Press
Judges weigh preclearance requirement for Alabama congressional plans
Federal judges on Tuesday sharply questioned lawyers on a request to make Alabama subject again to the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act after courts ruled the state intentionally diluted the voting strength of Black residents. Black voters and civil rights organizations, who brought a lawsuit that gave Alabama a new congressional map, are asking a three-judge panel to require any new congressional plans drawn in the next seven years go through federal review. The Alabama attorney general and the U.S. Department of Justice oppose the request. The Voting Rights Act for decades required states with a history of discrimination — including many in the South — to get federal approval before changing the way they hold elections. But the requirement of preclearance effectively went away in 2013 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the provision determining which states are covered was outdated and unconstitutional. The request is seeking to trigger the 'bail-in' provision of the Voting Rights Act. Alternatively, plaintiffs are asking the court to retain jurisdiction so any new plans can be addressed. Deuel Ross, an attorney with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, said Alabama demonstrated a pattern of resistance to drawing a congressional map that was fair to Black voters. He said the preclearance is needed to ensure Alabama doesn't 'backslide' the next time maps are drawn. 'There is no question what happened in this case extraordinary,' Ross told the panel. He pointed to the history of the case, including that lawmakers in 2023 'intentionally defied' a court order to draw a second majority-Black district or something close to it. Judges stepped in to select a new map for the state that was used in the 2024 elections. Alabama Solicitor General Edmund LaCour Jr. argued to the court that preclearance is an extraordinary remedy that is only appropriate after multiple violations. 'That test is not satisfied here,' LaCour told the panel. During the hearing, the judges asked if there were less stringent remedies than preclearance. However, U.S. District Judge Terry Moorer told LaCour said the best way to predict what someone will do is to 'look at what they have been doing.' He asked if the state expected to be 'divorced' from its history and noted the actions of state lawmakers 'Hasn't the state shown us who they are?' Moorer told LaCour. LaCour responded that the situation is different than when Congress created preclearance as part of the 1965 voting law. 'An attempt to persuade a court is far different than the attempt to evade a court that was happening in the 1950s and 1960s,' LaCour said. The same three-judge panel in May permanently blocked Alabama from using the state-drawn map that they said flouted their directive to draw a plan that was fair to Black voters. The state is appealing that decision.
29-07-2025
- Politics
Judges weigh preclearance requirement for Alabama congressional plans
Federal judges on Tuesday sharply questioned lawyers on a request to make Alabama subject again to the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act after courts ruled the state intentionally diluted the voting strength of Black residents. Black voters and civil rights organizations, who brought a lawsuit that gave Alabama a new congressional map, are asking a three-judge panel to require any new congressional plans drawn in the next seven years go through federal review. The Alabama attorney general and the U.S. Department of Justice oppose the request. The Voting Rights Act for decades required states with a history of discrimination — including many in the South — to get federal approval before changing the way they hold elections. But the requirement of preclearance effectively went away in 2013 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the provision determining which states are covered was outdated and unconstitutional. The request is seeking to trigger the 'bail-in' provision of the Voting Rights Act. Alternatively, plaintiffs are asking the court to retain jurisdiction so any new plans can be addressed. Deuel Ross, an attorney with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, said Alabama demonstrated a pattern of resistance to drawing a congressional map that was fair to Black voters. He said the preclearance is needed to ensure Alabama doesn't 'backslide' the next time maps are drawn. 'There is no question what happened in this case extraordinary,' Ross told the panel. He pointed to the history of the case, including that lawmakers in 2023 'intentionally defied' a court order to draw a second majority-Black district or something close to it. Judges stepped in to select a new map for the state that was used in the 2024 elections. Alabama Solicitor General Edmund LaCour Jr. argued to the court that preclearance is an extraordinary remedy that is only appropriate after multiple violations. 'That test is not satisfied here,' LaCour told the panel. During the hearing, the judges asked if there were less stringent remedies than preclearance. However, U.S. District Judge Terry Moorer told LaCour said the best way to predict what someone will do is to 'look at what they have been doing.' He asked if the state expected to be 'divorced' from its history and noted the actions of state lawmakers 'Hasn't the state shown us who they are?' Moorer told LaCour. LaCour responded that the situation is different than when Congress created preclearance as part of the 1965 voting law. 'An attempt to persuade a court is far different than the attempt to evade a court that was happening in the 1950s and 1960s,' LaCour said. The same three-judge panel in May permanently blocked Alabama from using the state-drawn map that they said flouted their directive to draw a plan that was fair to Black voters. The state is appealing that decision.
Associated Press
29-07-2025
- Politics
- Associated Press
Judges weigh preclearance requirement for Alabama congressional plans
Federal judges on Tuesday sharply questioned lawyers on a request to make Alabama subject again to the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act after courts ruled the state intentionally diluted the voting strength of Black residents. Black voters and civil rights organizations, who brought a lawsuit that gave Alabama a new congressional map, are asking a three-judge panel to require any new congressional plans drawn in the next seven years go through federal review. The Alabama attorney general and the U.S. Department of Justice oppose the request. The Voting Rights Act for decades required states with a history of discrimination — including many in the South — to get federal approval before changing the way they hold elections. But the requirement of preclearance effectively went away in 2013 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the provision determining which states are covered was outdated and unconstitutional. The request is seeking to trigger the 'bail-in' provision of the Voting Rights Act. Alternatively, plaintiffs are asking the court to retain jurisdiction so any new plans can be addressed. Deuel Ross, an attorney with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, said Alabama demonstrated a pattern of resistance to drawing a congressional map that was fair to Black voters. He said the preclearance is needed to ensure Alabama doesn't 'backslide' the next time maps are drawn. 'There is no question what happened in this case extraordinary,' Ross told the panel. He pointed to the history of the case, including that lawmakers in 2023 'intentionally defied' a court order to draw a second majority-Black district or something close to it. Judges stepped in to select a new map for the state that was used in the 2024 elections. Alabama Solicitor General Edmund LaCour Jr. argued to the court that preclearance is an extraordinary remedy that is only appropriate after multiple violations. 'That test is not satisfied here,' LaCour told the panel. During the hearing, the judges asked if there were less stringent remedies than preclearance. However, U.S. District Judge Terry Moorer told LaCour said the best way to predict what someone will do is to 'look at what they have been doing.' He asked if the state expected to be 'divorced' from its history and noted the actions of state lawmakers 'Hasn't the state shown us who they are?' Moorer told LaCour. LaCour responded that the situation is different than when Congress created preclearance as part of the 1965 voting law. 'An attempt to persuade a court is far different than the attempt to evade a court that was happening in the 1950s and 1960s,' LaCour said. The same three-judge panel in May permanently blocked Alabama from using the state-drawn map that they said flouted their directive to draw a plan that was fair to Black voters. The state is appealing that decision.
Los Angeles Times
09-07-2025
- Sport
- Los Angeles Times
Harvard-Westlake grads Max Fried, Pete Crow-Armstrong could face off at All-Star Game
When Harvard-Westlake grads Max Fried of the New York Yankees and Pete Crow-Armstrong of the Chicago Cubs are introduced on July 15 at the MLB All-Star Game in Atlanta, their former high school coaches, Matt LaCour and Jared Halpert, will be in the stands celebrating the historic moment. 'We're all proud on campus,' said LaCour, now the school's athletic director and former coach of Fried. 'It's kind of everyone wins if Max faces Pete,' Halpert said. Harvard-Westlake has received attention for its success sending pitchers to the majors with Fried, Lucas Giolito and Jack Flaherty, all of whom were members of the 2012 team and first-round draft picks. Crow-Armstrong, a first-round draft pick in 2020 who was selected by the fans to start in center field, is a breakthrough hitter for the Cubs. 'We've got a couple hitters coming through, so maybe we'll change the pitching narrative,' LaCour said. But who will the coaches root for if Fried is on the mound and Crow-Armstrong is at the plate? 'That definitely would be cool,' LaCour said. 'I'll root for Max and Jared will root for Pete.' LaCour is in Atlanta this week coaching a youth team and will stay an extra two days to watch the All-Star Game. Halpert is flying out next Tuesday morning, then taking a rideshare to the ballpark. They shouldn't have any trouble getting tickets because they know an all-star.
USA Today
16-05-2025
- Sport
- USA Today
Golden State Warriors jersey history - No. 12 - Fred LaCour (1963)
Golden State Warriors jersey history - No. 12 - Fred LaCour (1963) The Golden State Warriors have had over 600 players don the more than 60 jersey numbers used by their players over the more than 75 years of existence the team has enjoyed in its rich and storied history. Founded in 1946 during the Basketball Association of America (BAA -- a precursor league of the NBA) era, the team has called home the cities of Philadelphia, San Francisco, Oakland, and even San Diego. To commemorate the players who wore those numbers, Warriors Wire is covering the entire history of jersey numbers and the players who sported them since the founding of the team. For this article, we begin with the eighth of 28 players who wore the No. 12 jersey for the Warriors. That player would be Golden State wing alum Fred LaCour. After ending his college career at San Frnacisco, LaCour was picked up with the 22nd overall selection of the 1960 NBA draft by the (then) St. Louis (now, Atlanta) Hawks. The San Francisco, California native would play the first two seasons of his pro career with the Hawks before he signed with the Dubs in free agency in 1963. His stay with the team would span just 16 games, his last in the league. During his time suiting up for the Warriors, LaCour wore only jersey No. 12 and put up 4.1 points, 1.5 rebounds and 1.2 assists per game. All stats and data courtesy of Basketball Reference.
