Filed Date: Jan. 6, 2012
Closed Date: April 10, 2012
Clearinghouse coding complete
On January 6, 2012, Prince William County, Virginia (“Prince William County”), filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Assistant U.S. Attorney General Thomas E. Perez (collectively, “the Attorney General”), seeking an exemption or “bailout” from the preclearance provisions of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. On March 9, 2012, Prince William County and the Attorney General filed a joint motion for a consent decree approving the requested bailout. The Court granted the requested bailout and signed the consent decree proposed by Prince William County and the Attorney General on April 10, 2012.
As the result of a 1965 coverage determination by the Attorney General and the Director of the Census, the Commonwealth of Virginia and its political subdivisions (including Prince William County) became subject to special provisions of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, requiring Prince William County to obtain preclearance from the court or the Attorney General before adopting any change in its voting standards, practices, or procedures. Under Section 4(a) of the Voting Rights Act, Prince William County was eligible for an exemption – referred to as a “bailout” – from the preclearance requirements upon demonstrating satisfaction of various statutory criteria, generally requiring that, in the most recent ten years, Prince William County had not been involved in any discriminatory voting practices and had sought to expand minority participation in the political process.
After Prince William County’s complaint was filed, Prince William County and the Attorney General jointly sought a consent decree granting a bailout under Section 409(a)(9) of the Voting Rights Act, providing that the Attorney General can consent to entry of a declaratory judgment granting a bailout “if based upon a showing of objective and compelling evidence by the plaintiff, and upon investigation, he is satisfied that the State or political subdivision” has met the statutory requirements. The joint motion and proposed consent decree filed on March 9, 2012 stated that the Attorney General “conducted a comprehensive and independent investigation to determine the County’s eligibility for bailout.” Based on interviews of members of the local community and review of documentary evidence (including, but not limited to, demographic data, minutes from various governing bodies within Prince William County, and preclearance submissions from Prince William County seeking approval for prior changes to its voting practices), the Attorney General and Prince William County stipulated that the statutory requirements for a bailout were satisfied. Thus, a three-judge panel of the court granted the requested bailout on April 10, 2012.
Summary Authors
(11/24/2023)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17291954/parties/prince-william-county-virginia-v-holder/
Huvelle, Ellen Segal (District of Columbia)
Hebert, Joseph Gerald (District of Columbia)
McLeod, Michelle Andrea (District of Columbia)
Sitton, Janie Allison (District of Columbia)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17291954/prince-william-county-virginia-v-holder/
Last updated Aug. 10, 2025, 10:41 p.m.
State / Territory: District of Columbia
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Law Firm Antiracism Alliance (LFAA) project
Key Dates
Filing Date: Jan. 6, 2012
Closing Date: April 10, 2012
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
County Government
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Voting Rights Act, unspecified, 52 U.S.C. § 10301 et seq (previously 42 U.S.C § 1973 et seq.)
Available Documents:
Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Mixed
Nature of Relief:
Source of Relief:
Form of Settlement:
Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Amount Defendant Pays: None
Order Duration: 2012 - 2012
Issues
Voting: