assignment of right to vote

• Access to Justice
• Civil and Human Rights
• Corporate Accountability
• Criminal Law
• Environmental Protection
• Federal Courts and Nominations
• Health Care
• Immigration and Citizenship
• Rule of Law
• Voting Rights and Democracy

Constitutional Accountability Center

• Arc of Constitutional Progress
• America’s Second Founding
• The United States Constitution

OP-ED: How the Right to Vote Became Fundamental

A century ago, the Nineteenth Amendment was added to the Constitution, prohibiting state-sponsored voting discrimination on account of sex, and women’s status as equal citizens was formally etched in the Constitution’s text.  What is less well known is that the Nineteenth Amendment also helped cement the idea that the right to vote is a fundamental right inherent in citizenship.

For America’s first 150 years, the exclusion of half the population from participation in the electorate stood firmly in the way of viewing the right to vote as a fundamental right.  When, in the wake of Civil War, the Constitution was first amended to protect the right to vote, it drew a sharp line between men and women.  All citizens did not have a fundamental right to vote.  After all, women were citizens and, as  Reconstruction congressmen  repeatedly argued,  [w]omen do not vote .”  Although a “woman is as much a citizen as a man,” when it came to the right to vote, the Reconstruction Framers took the view that states “ may still discriminate .”  In short, instead of being a fundamental right, voting was viewed as a privilege that could be given to men and denied to women, who were deemed to be represented by men “ at the polls and in the affairs of Government .”

Indeed, in 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly wrote this cramped view of democracy into the Constitution by imposing a penalty of reduced congressional representation on states that denied or abridged the right to vote to any of its “male” citizens.  In 1870, at the very moment when the Fifteenth Amendment first recognized that the right to vote was necessary to make real the promise of freedom and equal citizenship for Black men, our national charter underscored that women had no claim to the ballot and could be relegated to second-class status.  The Reconstruction Framers, time and again, took it as a given that women would be indirectly represented by their “ fathers, husbands, brothers, and sons to whom the right of suffrage is given .”

Women’s rights activists of the 1860s and 1870s, however, rejected the idea that our foundational promises of democracy, freedom, and equality were real if half the population could be excluded from voting.  As  Frances Ellen Watkins Harper  argued at the Eleventh National Women’s Rights Convention, “we are all bound up together in one great bundle of humanity.”  She urged that we should “have no privileged class, trampling upon and outraging the unprivileged classes.”   Charlotte Rollin , a Black South Carolinian and the first of her state to serve as a delegate to a national suffrage convention, demanded the vote “not as a favor, not as a privilege, but as a right based on the ground that we are human beings, and as such entitled to all human rights.”   Susan B. Anthony  put these arguments in constitutional form, insisting that the “[t]he Constitution as it is protects me.  If I could get a practical application of the Constitution it would protect me and all women in the enjoyment of perfect equality of rights everywhere under the shadow of the American flag.”

Anthony’s constitutional argument failed to convince the courts that women already had the right to vote, but led to what  Carrie Chapman Catt  called “fifty-two years of pauseless campaign” to “get the word ‘male’ out of the Constitution.”  The Nineteenth Amendment erased the idea that women should be governed and represented at the polls by the men in their family.  The Amendment replaced virtual representation by men with the idea that women’s status as citizens entailed the right to vote.  Individuals—not households—were the basic units of our democracy.  By erasing the gender line in voting, the Nineteenth Amendment helped establish the idea that the right to vote is a fundamental part of what it means to be a citizen, not simply a privilege enjoyed only by men.  It forged a close connection between individual citizenship and the right to vote and opened the door to a more inclusive democracy.

To be sure, the reality of the Nineteenth Amendment did not always live up to its promise.  While the Nineteenth Amendment promised the ballot for half the population, in reality it  left behind women of color , who repeatedly faced  literacy tests, Klan violence, and other discriminatory barriers when they sought to vote .  Black women ,  Native women ,  Latina , and  Asian American women  continued to suffer state-sponsored voting discrimination.  While white suffragists staged huge parades to celebrate what they viewed as a crowning achievement, women of color, all too often, found that they were still shut out of equal citizenship and full participation in our democracy.  As Black suffragist  Coralie Franklin Cook  put it, the suffragist movement had “turned its back on women of color.”

Because states, for decades, were free to flout the Fifteenth Amendment, the Nineteenth Amendment’s protections proved irrelevant.  Black women, such as Mary Church Terrell, Ida B. Wells, Ella Baker, Fannie Lou Hamer, and numerous others, had to continue to fight to ensure the vibrant, inclusive democracy that the Constitution already promised.  The struggle required a national movement to end what Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., called “ the flagrant denial of the right to vote .”  The Voting Right Act of 1965, not the Nineteenth Amendment, proved to be the measure that ended the widespread disenfranchisement of women of color.

Amendments that followed the Nineteenth Amendment, spurred on by social movements, further enshrined the idea that voting is an individual right that belongs to all citizens.  In 1964, the Twenty-Fourth Amendment abolished the use of poll taxes or other taxes on voting in federal elections, reflecting that “ a citizen of the United States should not have to pay for his constitutional right to vote .” Because the right to vote was fundamental, the Amendment’s Framers insisted that “ the payment of money, whether directly or indirectly, whether in a small amount or in a large amount, should never be permitted to reign as a criterion of democracy .”  In 1971,  the Twenty-Sixth Amendment took aim at age discrimination in voting .  Citizens aged eighteen years of age, who were being asked to go to war for the nation, could not be excluded from the right to vote because of their age.  Age, like wealth, race, and sex, could no longer be a justification to fence out citizens from our democracy.  Exclusions that had long made voting a mere privilege were no more.

One hundred years later, the Nineteenth Amendment reminds us that the arc of our constitutional progress is a story of the struggle to close gaps that all too often exist between our constitutional promises and lived realities.  The story of the Nineteenth Amendment reminds us both how far we have come and how far we have to go to ensure that the right to vote can be enjoyed as a fundamental right possessed by all Americans.  While there is no right protected by more parts of the Constitution than the right to vote, still, here in 2020, we must fight continuing efforts to make it harder for all people to exercise their franchise.  To those generations of women and men who sacrificed so much to the cause of voting rights, there is no greater tribute we can pay to them than to carry on the fight to which they dedicated, and even gave, their lives.

Get updates on our work

More from voting rights and democracy, constitutional questions for voting rights act abound in louisiana map fight, alpha phi alpha fraternity, inc. v. secretary, state of georgia, the airtight case against texas’ mail-in voting age requirements, black voters matter capacity building institute v. byrd, petteway v. galveston county, cascino v. nelson.

ENCYCLOPEDIC ENTRY

The 15th amendment to the united states constitution.

The 15th Amendment guaranteed African-American men the right to vote. Almost immediately after ratification, African Americans began to take part in running for office and voting.

Geography, Human Geography, Social Studies, U.S. History

Voters in 1950s Harlem

The United States' 15th Amendment made voting legal for African-American men. However, voting for them was almost nonexistent in some places, especially in the South, because of threats, violence, and unethical practices, like poll taxes

Photograph by Bettman/Getty Images

The 15th  Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified on February 3, 1870. The amendment reads, “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude .” The 15th Amendment guaranteed African American men the right to vote. In addition, the right to vote could not be denied to anyone in the future based on a person’s race. Although African American men technically had their voting rights protected, in practice, this victory was short-lived. Local and state governments found ways to weaken the amendment to prevent African Americans from voting. Disenfranchisement is the word used to describe laws passed to prevent people from voting and obtaining rights other citizens have. The actions to prevent African Americans from exercising their civil rights became known as “Jim Crow” laws. Some examples of Jim Crow laws are poll taxes (a fee required to vote—generally not applied to white voters), literacy tests (the Mississippi test asked applicants to copy a portion of the state constitution at the white administrator's discretion), or owning property as a condition of voting. Jim Crow laws were enforced by election boards or by groups, such as the Ku Klux Klan, who intimidated African Americans with violence if they voted or wished to do so. The southern region of the United States made little or no effort to protect the voting rights of African Americans guaranteed by the Constitution. The 15th Amendment was a milestone for civil rights. However, it was not until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was passed by Congress that the majority of African Americans would be truly free to register and vote in large numbers.

Media Credits

The audio, illustrations, photos, and videos are credited beneath the media asset, except for promotional images, which generally link to another page that contains the media credit. The Rights Holder for media is the person or group credited.

Production Managers

Program specialists, last updated.

October 19, 2023

User Permissions

For information on user permissions, please read our Terms of Service. If you have questions about how to cite anything on our website in your project or classroom presentation, please contact your teacher. They will best know the preferred format. When you reach out to them, you will need the page title, URL, and the date you accessed the resource.

If a media asset is downloadable, a download button appears in the corner of the media viewer. If no button appears, you cannot download or save the media.

Text on this page is printable and can be used according to our Terms of Service .

Interactives

Any interactives on this page can only be played while you are visiting our website. You cannot download interactives.

Related Resources

• Asian Pacific American History
• Women's History
• Collections

Does an amendment give you the right to vote?

In 2020, the Fifteenth Amendment—the first voting rights amendment added to the U.S. Constitution—celebrates its 150th anniversary. You’ve likely heard, perhaps on the news or in the classroom, that the Fifteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gave or granted African American men the right to vote. It’s a turn of phrase that works as a shorthand.

Unfortunately, it’s also a bit misleading.

As written, the Fifteenth Amendment does not explicitly grant anyone the right to vote. Instead, it prohibits federal and state governments from placing restrictions on voting based on three criteria: race, color, and previous condition of servitude. The entire amendment is two sentences long:

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation

Later voting rights amendments to the U.S. Constitution—especially the Nineteenth and Twenty-Sixth Amendments —copied the Fifteenth’s structure and its wording, declaring that the right to vote “shall not be denied” on account of sex or age, respectively. These amendments removed important barriers to suffrage, but they stopped short of affirming that all Americans have a constitutional right to vote. Even today, U.S. states have incredible power over who is allowed to participate in elections.

But the problems with this shorthand—saying the amendment gave African Americans the vote—go deeper than the level of language. Perhaps most importantly, this phrasing obscures what happened after the Constitution was amended. For a brief time after its ratification in 1870, the Fifteenth Amendment worked as intended, sweeping away laws and constitutional provisions that had prevented African American men from voting. However, by the end of the 1800s, state governments throughout the South had adopted new laws and regulations that did not directly reference race or color but still stripped African American men of their access to direct participation in the nation’s political life. Literacy tests , poll taxes , elaborate registration systems, intimidation, and violence—including violent assaults and lynchings — were all used to silence African American voters and exclude them from the polls.

African Americans and their allies fought against these restrictions and other injustices, but it took decades of protesting, lobbying, organizing, and legal challenges—forms of political activism that went beyond the ballot —as well as the active intervention of the federal government to ensure that the Fifteenth Amendment could live up to its revolutionary potential. Ultimately, the full promise of the Fifteenth Amendment was not realized until the 1960s , almost a century after it was added to the U.S. Constitution.

In 2020, the Fifteenth Amendment turns 150. To mark the anniversary, the museum’s blog is publishing a series that reexamines the amendment, exploring its origins, its ratification, and its many legacies for the nation.

Jordan Grant is a Digital Experience specialist in the Office of Audience Engagement.

Related Stories

They marched with torches: Getting out the vote, 1840–1900

Greensboro, Charlottesville, and the nation we build together

Fannie Lou Hamer: Voting rights trailblazer

Skip to Main Content - Keyboard Accessible

Voting rights: overview.

• U.S. Constitution Annotated

Fourteenth Amendment , Section 1:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Although, of course, the denial of the franchise on the basis of race or color violates the Fifteenth Amendment and a series of implementing statutes enacted by Congress, 1 Footnote See “Federal Remedial Legislation,” infra . the administration of election statutes so as to treat white and black voters or candidates differently can constitute a denial of equal protection as well. 2 Footnote E.g. , Hadnott v. Amos, 394 U.S. 358 (1971) ; Hunter v. Underwood, 471 U.S. 222 (1985) (disenfranchisement for crimes involving moral turpitude adopted for purpose of racial discrimination). Additionally, cases of gerrymandering of electoral districts and the creation or maintenance of electoral practices that dilute and weaken black and other minority voting strength is subject to Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendment and statutory attack. 3 Footnote E.g. , Gomillion v. Lightfoot, 364 U.S. 339 (1960) ; United Jewish Orgs. v. Carey, 430 U.S. 144 (1977) ; Rogers v. Lodge, 458 U.S. 613 (1982) .

Fundamental Interests: The Political Process

“The States have long been held to have broad powers to determine the conditions under which the right of suffrage may be exercised . . . , absent of course the discrimination which the Constitution condemns.” 4 Footnote Lassiter v. Northampton County Bd. of Elections, 360 U.S. 45, 50–51 (1959) . The Constitution provides that the qualifications of electors in congressional elections are to be determined by reference to the qualifications prescribed in the states for the electors of the most numerous branch of the legislature, and the states are authorized to determine the manner in which presidential electors are selected. 5 Footnote Article I, § 2, cl. 1 (House of Representatives); Seventeenth Amendment (Senators); Article II, § 1, cl. 2 (presidential electors); Article I, § 4, cl. 1 (times, places, and manner of holding elections). The second section of the Fourteenth Amendment provides for a proportionate reduction in a state’s representation in the House when it denies the franchise to its qualified male citizens 6 Footnote Fourteenth Amendment , § 2. Justice Harlan argued that the inclusion of this provision impliedly permitted the states to discriminate with only the prescribed penalty in consequence and that therefore the equal protection clause was wholly inapplicable to state election laws. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 589 (1964) (dissenting); Carrington v. Rash, 380 U.S. 89, 97 (1965) (dissenting); Oregon v. Mitchell, 400 U.S. 112, 152 (1970) (concurring and dissenting). Justice Brennan undertook a rebuttal of this position in Oregon v. Mitchell , 400 U.S. at 229, 250 (concurring and dissenting). But see Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974) , where § 2 was relevant in precluding an equal protection challenge. and specific discriminations on the basis of race, sex, and age are addressed in other Amendments. “We do not suggest that any standards which a State desires to adopt may be required of voters. But there is wide scope for exercise of its jurisdiction. Residence requirements, age, previous criminal record . . . are obvious examples indicating factors which a state may take into consideration in determining the qualification of voters. The ability to read and write likewise has some relation to standards designed to promote intelligent use of the ballot.” 7 Footnote Lassiter v. Northampton County Bd. of Elections, 360 U.S. 45, 51 (1959) .

The perspective of this 1959 opinion by Justice Douglas has now been revolutionized. “Undoubtedly, the right of suffrage is a fundamental matter in a free and democratic society. Especially since the right to exercise the franchise in a free and unimpaired manner is preservative of other basic civil and political rights, any alleged infringement of the rights of citizens to vote must be carefully and meticulously scrutinized.” 8 Footnote Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 561–62 (1964) . “Any unjustified discrimination in determining who may participate in political affairs or in the selection of public officials undermines the legitimacy of representative government. . . . Statutes granting the franchise to residents on a selective basis always pose the danger of denying some citizens any effective voice in the governmental affairs which substantially affect their lives. Therefore, if a challenged state statute grants the right to vote to some bona fide residents of requisite age and citizenship and denies the franchise to others, the Court must determine whether the exclusions are necessary to promote a compelling state interest.”

“And, for these reasons, the deference usually given to the judgment of legislators does not extend to decisions concerning which resident citizens may participate in the election of legislators and other public officials. . . . [W]hen we are reviewing statutes which deny some residents the right to vote, the general presumption of constitutionality afforded state statutes and the traditional approval given state classifications if the Court can conceive of a ‘rational basis’ for the distinctions made are not applicable.” 9 Footnote Kramer v. Union Free School Dist., 395 U.S. 621, 626–28 (1969) . See also Hill v. Stone, 421 U.S. 289, 297 (1975) . But cf. Holt Civic Club v. City of Tuscaloosa, 439 U.S. 60 (1978) . Using this analytical approach, the Court has established a regime of close review of a vast range of state restrictions on the eligibility to vote, on access to the ballot by candidates and parties, and on the weighing of votes cast through the devices of apportionment and districting. Changes in Court membership over the years has led to some relaxation in the application of principles, but even as the Court has drawn back in other areas it has tended to preserve, both doctrinally and in fact, the election cases. 10 Footnote Thus, in San Antonio School Dist. v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1, 34–35 nn.74 & 78 (1973) , a major doctrinal effort to curb the “fundamental interest” side of the “new” equal protection, the Court acknowledged that the right to vote did not come within its prescription that rights to be deemed fundamental must be explicitly or implicitly guaranteed in the Constitution. Nonetheless, citizens have a “constitutionally protected right to participate in elections,” which is protected by the Equal Protection Clause. Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330, 336 (1972) . The franchise is the guardian of all other rights. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 562 (1964) .

The following state regulations pages link to this page.

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Voting rights laws and constitutional amendments

Federal laws govern voting rights. Learn about the laws and how they protect your rights and make it easier for you to vote.

U.S. election laws date back to Article 1 of the Constitution. This gave states the responsibility of overseeing federal elections. Many constitutional amendments and federal laws protecting voting rights have been passed since then.

Constitutional amendments affecting voting rights

• The 15th Amendment gave African American men the right to vote in 1870. But many weren't able to exercise this right. Some states used literacy tests and other barriers to make it harder to vote.
• The 19th Amendment , ratified in 1920, gave American women the right to vote.
• The 24th Amendment , ratified in 1964, eliminated poll taxes. The tax had been used in some states to keep African Americans from voting in federal elections.
• The 26th Amendment , ratified in 1971, lowered the voting age for all elections to 18.

Federal voting rights laws

Federal laws passed over the years help protect Americans' right to vote and make it easier for citizens to exercise that right:

• Civil Rights Act of 1957
• Civil Rights Act of 1960
• Civil Rights Act of 1964
• The act also placed limits on certain states with a history of voter discrimination. These states had to get federal approval before passing voter restrictions. A 2013 Supreme Court decision struck down this rule.
• The Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act of 1984 required polling places to be accessible to people with disabilities.
• The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) of 1986 allowed members of the U.S. armed forces and U.S. voters abroad to register and vote by mail.
• The National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993 created new ways to register to vote. It also called for states to keep more accurate voter registration lists.
• The Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 authorized the federal funding of elections. It also created the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) . The EAC helps states comply with HAVA to adopt minimum standards on voter education, registration, and ballots.
• The Military and Overseas Voting Empowerment (MOVE) Act of 2009 improved access to voting by military voters and voters living outside of the U.S.

Learn more about the federal laws that protect your ability to vote with  Know Your Voting Rights  from the Department of Justice.

State voter ID laws

Most states require you to show some form of identification before you're allowed to vote. Learn more about states' voter ID requirements .

LAST UPDATED: February 22, 2024

Have a question?

Ask a real person any government-related question for free. They will get you the answer or let you know where to find it.

Advertisement

Does the Constitution Guarantee a Right to Vote? The Answer May Surprise You.

For decades, the courts and Congress have taken the lead in expanding the legal right to vote, but the founders never explicitly included it.

• Share full article

By Michael Wines

• Oct. 26, 2022

The Constitution makes reference to voting 15 times in the original document and another 22 in the amendments. But somewhat surprisingly, none of those mentions makes an explicit declaration that Americans have a right to vote — something many politicians and their supporters consider fundamental to democracy. Here’s a look at why that is, and what rights voters actually have.

What did the founding fathers believe about the right to vote?

If it seems odd that such a fundamental right was not enshrined in writing, the explanation is simple enough: The authors of the Constitution, many of them deeply suspicious of universal suffrage, could not agree on a single standard for the right to cast a ballot.

For all their talk about “We, the people,” most of the founding fathers wanted to limit voting rights to property owners like themselves, the Harvard law professor and historian Michael J. Klarman wrote in his 2016 book “The Framers’ Coup: The Making of the United States Constitution.”

Gouverneur Morris, a New Yorker who wrote the preamble to the Constitution, argued that “the ignorant and the dependent can be as little trusted with the public interest” as could children, Dr. Klarman wrote. James Madison warned that voting should be restricted to the wealthy, “the safest repositories of republican liberty,” because the poorer classes would be swayed by populist appeals. Benjamin Franklin, the most prominent dissenter, pointed out that it was the commoners who had fought for and won American independence and that the rich were hardly immune to corrupting influences.

In the end, the property requirement failed to make it into the Constitution in part because many states already had extended the franchise beyond landholders. Disenfranchising those voters, the constitutional convention delegates feared, could wreck what already seemed to be shaky prospects for approving the new Constitution.

Their compromise left decisions on voter qualifications to the states, but it placed the choice of United States senators and the president in the hands of state legislators, not voters. That changed in the early 19th century, as state legislatures increasingly delegated the choice of presidential electors to ordinary voters, and in 1913, after the 17th Amendment decreed the popular election of senators.

Does a right to vote exist today?

Various constitutional amendments prohibit denying voting rights to women, racial minorities, citizens over age 18 and people unable to pay election-related fees like poll taxes.

But the Constitution contains no explicit right to vote. Rather, the Supreme Court has recognized an implicit right to vote via the 14th Amendment, enacted in 1868 after the Civil War, which aimed to protect the civil rights of people who had been enslaved and guarantees “the equal protection of the laws.”

The court has recognized it in a handful of decisions dealing with the meaning of those amendments. “Undeniably the Constitution of the United States protects the right of all qualified citizens to vote, in state as well as in federal elections,” Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote in the historic 1964 ruling, Reynolds v. Sims, that cemented the concept that every vote has an equal value. But even a Supreme Court ruling falls short of the guarantees of rights such as freedom of speech and religion that are embedded in the Bill of Rights.

In practice, the Constitution leaves most decisions about the ballot to state and federal legislators, saying that the “times, places and manner” of elections are state matters unless Congress sets nationwide standards.

What most Americans see as an inalienable right to vote is actually the product of decades of court rulings and legislative decisions, most of them — but hardly all — slowly expanding a legal guarantee of the ability to cast a ballot. Congress could give everyone the right to vote by mail, but since it has not, mail balloting is subject to a jumble of state laws. The 19th Amendment, ratified in 1920, gave women the right to vote, but by then, Wyoming had been letting women vote for 50 years, even when it was a territory, not a state.

What does the future hold?

For decades, courts and Congress have taken the lead in upholding a legal right to vote — in the Voting Rights Act of 1965; in the 1966 Supreme Court case, Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, which outlawed poll taxes; in federal legislation in 1993 that set ground rules for registering new voters and removing existing voters from the rolls.

In lawsuits seeking to enforce or protect existing election laws, the 14th Amendment’s implicit guarantee of voting rights has become a mainstay of plaintiffs’ arguments.

“As long as those precedents are respected, I think it’s fair to say there’s a constitutional protection of a basic right to vote,” Edward B. Foley, a leading scholar of election law at Ohio State University, said in an interview.

But the evolution of an increasingly conservative Supreme Court with a skeptical approach to voting rights and an emerging record of upending precedents means that the current interpretation of the right to vote is no longer a sure bet, he said.

The court is considering two major voting cases this term — one that could limit the Voting Rights Act’s power to remedy racial disparities in political districts, the other arguing that state courts have no authority to overturn legislative decisions on political redistricting and election laws — that could reverse once-solid precedents.

Indeed, what most voters would consider a foundational right — electing a president — exists nowhere in the Constitution, which says presidential electors may be appointed “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.”

Democrats in both the U.S. House and Senate filed legislation last year that would establish a statutory right to vote , but neither bill has received a hearing. And for years, voting-rights advocates have pressed for a new constitutional amendment affirming citizens’ right to cast a ballot. So far, it’s all been to no avail.

Sheelagh McNeill contributed research.

Michael Wines writes about voting and other election-related issues. Since joining The Times in 1988, he has covered the Justice Department, the White House, Congress, Russia, southern Africa, China and various other topics.  More about Michael Wines

Assignment of Rights Agreement: Everything You Need to Know

An assignment of rights agreement refers to a situation in which one party, known as the assignor, shifts contract rights to another party, known as assignee. 3 min read updated on February 01, 2023

An assignment of rights agreement refers to a situation in which one party, known as the assignor, shifts contract rights to another party. The party taking on the rights is known as the assignee.

An Assignment of Rights Agreement

The following is an example of an assignment of rights agreement. Dave decides to buy a bicycle from John for $100 and after agreeing on the price, Dave and John draw up a written agreement. Let's suppose that there will be a one week wait before the bicycle is ready for delivery to Dave and before anything is passed between them.

Meanwhile, John accepts that he will transfer his right to be paid $100 from Dave to Rob, in exchange for Rob paying John $90 immediately. Let's assume that John's motivation is an immediate need for cash. In this context, John is regarded as the assignor and Rob is the assignee.

John is the assignor as he is giving the assignment to Rob and Rob is the assignee because he is acquiring the assignment from John. To put it simply, the assignee is the party who gets something. In this case, Rob will receive $100.

Rules of Assignments

Assignments frequently occur in contracts. It's important to note the following points:

• The assignor (e.g. John) is accountable according to the contract unless the parties make an agreement that states otherwise.
• This means that if Dave does not receive the bicycle, he can sue John for it.
• Assignments are allowed in almost every type of agreement unless the contract includes an explicit ban on assignments or unless a specific exception is applicable.
• The assignor does not need to speak to the other contract party in order to create the assignment. For example, John would not need to ask Dave if John can transfer his right to be paid to Rob.

Exceptions Where a Contract Cannot be Assigned

• Some exceptions dictate that a contract cannot be assigned .
• Unenforceable assignments include the following: a personal services agreement, changing the contract duties, changing the material provisions of the agreement (e.g. time, amount, location, etc.).
• An example of a personal services agreement, which cannot be assigned, would be if you decided to employ a particular professional writer to write a book for you.
• That writer would not be allowed to take your payment and then give the work to another writer because you employed that particular writer to write the book, rather than someone else.
• Some kinds of assignments have to be in writing in order to be enforceable such as assignments of actual property (e.g. selling your house), loans, or debts.
• It's best to look at the statute of frauds for more information on the kinds of agreements that must be in writing.

Delegations and Novations

A delegation is very similar to an assignment in terms of what it involves. A delegation takes place when a party moves his or her obligations (or liabilities) under an agreement to a different party. Assignments, on the other hand, involve the transfer of rights.

If the parties in our previous example had created a novation , Rob would be entirely accountable to Dave and John would be clear of responsibility. A novation replaces the earliest party with a new party.

Contract Assignment

An Assignment Agreement can also be called a Contract Assignment. Another example of this would be if you're a contractor who needs assistance finishing a job. You could give those tasks and rights to a subcontractor, but only if the original agreement does not prohibit the assignment of these rights and responsibilities.

Creating an Assignment Agreement

In an Assignment Agreement, it is important to include details such as:

• The name of the person assigning the responsibilities (known as the assignor)
• The name of the of the party who is taking the rights and responsibilities (the assignee)
• The other party to the first agreement (known as the obligor)
• The name of the agreement and its expiration date
• Whether the first contract necessitates the obligor's approval before assigning rights
• The date of the obligor's consent
• When the contract will be put into effect
• Which state's laws will regulate the contract

If you need help with an assignment of rights agreement, you can post your legal need on UpCounsel's marketplace. UpCounsel accepts only the top 5 percent of lawyers to its site. Lawyers on UpCounsel come from law schools such as Harvard Law and Yale Law and average 14 years of legal experience, including work with or on behalf of companies like Google, Menlo Ventures, and Airbnb.

Hire the top business lawyers and save up to 60% on legal fees

Content Approved by UpCounsel

• Assignment of Rights Example
• Assignment of Contract Rights
• Assignment of Rights and Obligations Under a Contract
• Partial Assignment of Contract
• Assignment Contract Law
• What Is the Definition of Assigns
• Assignment Law
• Assignment Of Contracts
• Legal Assignment
• Delegation vs Assignment

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

When Did African Americans Actually Get the Right to Vote?

By: Sarah Pruitt

Updated: April 15, 2021 | Original: January 29, 2020

In the immediate aftermath of the Civil War , the United States found itself in uncharted territory. With the Confederacy ’s defeat, some 4 million enslaved Black men, women and children had been granted their freedom, an emancipation that would be formalized with passage of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution .

For Black Americans, gaining the full rights of citizenship—and especially the right to vote—was central to securing true freedom and self-determination. “Slavery is not abolished until the Black man has the ballot,” Frederick Douglass famously said in May 1865 , a month after the Union victory at Appomattox.

Presidential Reconstruction & Black Codes

After Abraham Lincoln was assassinated in April 1865, the task of reconstructing the Union fell to his successor, Andrew Johnson . A North Carolina-born Unionist, Johnson believed strongly in state’s rights, and showed great leniency toward white Southerners in his Reconstruction policy. He required the former Confederate states to ratify the 13th Amendment and pledge loyalty to the Union, but otherwise granted them free rein in reestablishing their post-war governments.

As a result, in 1865-66, most Southern state legislatures enacted restrictive laws known as Black codes , which strictly governed Black citizens’ behaviors and denied them suffrage and other rights.

Radical Republicans in Congress were outraged, arguing that the Black codes went a long way toward reestablishing slavery in all but name. Early in 1866, Congress passed the Civil Rights Bill, which aimed to build on the 13th Amendment and give Black Americans the rights of citizens. When Johnson vetoed the bill, on the basis of opposing federal action on behalf of formerly enslaved people, Congress overrode his veto, marking the first time in the nation’s history that major legislation became law over a presidential veto.

The 14th & 15th Amendments

With passage of a new Reconstruction Act (again over Johnson’s veto) in March 1867, the era of Radical, or Congressional, Reconstruction, began. Over the next decade, Black Americans voted in huge numbers across the South, electing a total of 22 Black men to serve in the U.S. Congress (two in the Senate) and helping to elect Johnson’s Republican successor, Ulysses S. Grant , in 1868.

The 14th Amendment , approved by Congress in 1866 and ratified in 1868, granted citizenship to all persons “born or naturalized in the United States,” including former slaves, and guaranteed “equal protection of the laws” to all citizens. In 1870, Congress passed the last of the three so-called Reconstruction Amendments, the 15th Amendment , which stated that voting rights could not be “denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”

Reconstruction saw biracial democracy exist in the South for the first time, though much of the power in state governments remained in white hands. Like Black voters, Black officials faced the constant threat of intimidation and violence, often at the hands of the Ku Klux Klan or other white supremacist groups.

Reconstruction to the Civil Rights Era

While the 15th Amendment barred voting rights discrimination on the basis of race, it left the door open for states to determine the specific qualifications for suffrage. Southern state legislatures used such qualifications—including literacy tests, poll taxes and other discriminatory practices—to disenfranchise a majority of Black voters in the decades following Reconstruction. 

As a result, white-dominated state legislatures consolidated control and effectively reestablished the Black codes in the form of so-called Jim Crow laws , a system of segregation that would remain in place for nearly a century.

In the 1950s and ‘60s, securing voting rights for African Americans in the South became a central focus of the civil rights movement . While the sweeping Civil Rights Act of 1964 finally banned segregation in schools and other public places, it did little to remedy the problem of discrimination in voting rights.

The brutal attacks by state and local law enforcement on hundreds of peaceful marchers led by Martin Luther King, Jr. and other civil rights activists in Selma , Alabama in March 1965 drew unprecedented attention to the movement for voting rights. Later that year, President Lyndon Johnson signed into law the Voting Rights Act , which banned literacy tests and other methods used to disenfranchise Black voters. In 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections that poll taxes (which the 24th Amendment had eliminated for federal elections in 1964) were unconstitutional for state and local elections as well.

Continued Challenges to Black Voting Rights

Before passage of the Voting Rights Act, an estimated 23 percent of eligible Black voters were registered nationwide; by 1969 that number rose to 61 percent . By 1980, the percentage of the adult Black population on Southern voter rolls surpassed that in the rest of the country, the historian James C. Cobb wrote in 2015 , adding that by the mid-1980s there were more Black people in public office in the South than in the rest of the nation combined.

In 2012, turnout of Black voters exceeded that of white voters for the first time in history, as 66.6 percent of eligible Black voters turned out to help reelect Barack Obama , the nation’s first African American president.

In 2013, the Supreme Court struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, ruling 5-4 in Shelby v. Holder that it was unconstitutional to require states with a history of voter discrimination to seek federal approval before changing their election laws. In the wake of the Court’s decision, a number of states passed new restrictions on voting, including limiting early voting and requiring voters to show photo ID. Supporters argue such measures are designed to prevent voter fraud, while critics say they—like poll taxes and literacy tests before them—disproportionately affect poor, elderly, Black and Latino voters. 

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

Mobile Menu Overlay

The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20500

Statement from Vice President Kamala   Harris on Administration’s Voting Rights   Efforts

Every American has a right to have their voice heard at the ballot box, and no American should be kept from voting early, voting by mail, or voting at all. Our democracy is strongest when everyone participates, and it is weaker when people are left out. Throughout the arc of our nation’s history, many have worked—and many have died—to ensure that all Americans can cast a ballot and have their vote counted. Today, that hard-won progress is under assault. In the last election, more people voted than ever before. Since then, more than 380 bills have been introduced across the country that would make it harder for Americans to vote. These bills seek to restrict the options that make voting more convenient and accessible, including early voting and vote by mail. Our Administration will not stand by when confronted with any effort that keeps Americans from voting.  We must protect the fundamental right to vote for all Americans regardless of where they live. There are two important bills in Congress that would do just that. The For the People Act would provide all Americans with fair and accessible voting options, and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act would prevent discriminatory changes to voting laws and procedures.  President Joe Biden asked me to help lead our Administration’s effort to protect the fundamental right to vote for all Americans. In the days and weeks ahead, I will engage the American people, and I will work with voting rights organizations, community organizations, and the private sector to help strengthen and uplift efforts on voting rights nationwide. And we will also work with members of Congress to help advance these bills. The work ahead of us is to make voting accessible to all American voters, and to make sure every vote is counted through a free, fair, and transparent process. This is the work of democracy.

Stay Connected

We'll be in touch with the latest information on how President Biden and his administration are working for the American people, as well as ways you can get involved and help our country build back better.

Opt in to send and receive text messages from President Biden.

The 19th Amendment: A Woman’s Right to Vote

Download this video for classroom use.

Voting is the most basic right of a citizen and the most important right in a democracy. When you vote, you are choosing the people who will make the laws. For almost a century and a half of our nation’s history, women were barred from exercising this fundamental right. This is a film about their long, difficult struggle to win the right to vote. It’s about citizenship, the power of the vote, and why women had to change the Constitution with the 19th Amendment to get the vote.

Awards & Honors

• 2020 Gold Hermes Creative Award
• 2020 Silver Telly Award
• 2020 Clarion Award

Related Resources

• Handout: The Unfinished Business of Women’s Equality: Educators' Guide
• Timeline: 19th Amendment
• Handout: Influential Movements in the Struggle for Women’s Suffrage
• Handout: The 19th Amendment: Primary Sources
• Handout: The 19th Amendment: Scholarly Articles and Book Chapters

Where Does School Segregation Stand, 70 Years After Brown v. Board of Education?

A still from the 2014 FRONTLINE documentary "Separate and Unequal."

As the United States marks the 70th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark Brown v. Board of Education ruling, many of the nation’s classrooms remain racially separate and unequal.

FRONTLINE examined one element of the resurgence of school segregation in the 2014 documentary Separate and Unequal , which was recently released on YouTube for the first time.

The documentary followed a group of mostly white, middle-class residents in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, working to carve out a new city — and school district — following concerns that East Baton Rouge Parish District schools were underperforming and dangerous.

Last month, after a 12-year battle, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled  to allow the incorporation of the new city of St. George.

Such school district secession efforts across the country are one of the factors contributing to racial segregation in schools, studies show. As of 2022, more than 18 million American students — one in three — attended K-12 public schools in which a majority of students are of one race or ethnicity, a 10-year government analysis found. Schools that secede from larger districts typically end up less racially diverse, according to the report.

“I think it speaks volumes that decades after ‘separate but equal’ was supposed to end, we still have millions of kids who are attending what are essentially single-race schools,” said Jacqueline Nowicki, director of Education, Workforce and Income Security at the U.S. Government Accountability Office, which issued the 2022 report .

A Troubled History

In the May 17, 1954, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas ruling , the Supreme Court found that the longstanding precedent of “separate but equal” schools for Black and white children was unconstitutional. In the aftermath, many white residents revolted , attacking pro-integration activists and eroding integrated public schools by fleeing the districts, defunding them or closing them altogether.

In the decades that followed, federally mandated busing and ongoing oversight gradually led to more racially diverse American schools.

But when some court orders were lifted in the 1980s and 1990s, studies show , schools began to resegregate. Since then, many factors have contributed to the resurgence of school segregation — including school secession movements.

A ‘Breakaway Movement’ in the Spotlight

Proponents say such efforts create more community-oriented schools and improve their childrens’ education. In the 2014 documentary Separate and Unequal , Norman Browning, a leader of the movement to carve out the City of St. George from Baton Rouge, said, “They’re failing our children because our children are not getting the education they deserve.”

Critics have argued that such efforts reverse hard-fought civil rights gains and leave schools less racially and economically diverse.

“The end result of that is it excludes children, and those children are minority children. Those children are Black children,” Domoine D. Rutledge, then East Baton Rouge Parish school district’s attorney, said in the film. “We have done a full-throttle reversal in this community, and we’re resegregating our school system.”

A 2019 ballot initiative to form the new city of St. George won by 54%. At the time of the vote, the proposed city would have been more than 70% white and less than 15% Black — compared to East Baton Rouge Parish which was around 46.5% Black, according to Census estimates. The city’s boundaries have shifted since then to include 100,000 residents .

Last month, after the Louisiana Supreme Court decision allowing St. George to be incorporated as a city, Andrew Murrell, a leader of the effort, in a statement called the ruling a “culmination of citizens exercising their constitutional rights.” He added, “Now we begin the process of delivering on our promises of a better city.”

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) Baton Rouge branch said in a statement , “The St. George plan poses significant risks to our education system, threatens the continuity of critical programs, and challenges community representation.” It also echoed concerns about “potential segregation and unequal resource distribution.”

Baton Rouge leaders said that the new city would take millions in annual tax revenue away from a majority-Black district. The estimates of how much annual tax revenue would be lost vary widely.

As Separate and Unequal reported, St. George advocates argued that the racial and financial implications of their plan were being exaggerated.

“When I read headlines such as the fact that this is nothing but a secession to get away from the low-income citizens, as well as making it a race issue, it’s extremely disturbing to me,” Norman Browning said in the documentary. “This is nothing more than a middle-class community incorporating a city.”

Broader Impacts of Breakaway Movements

The GAO, a non-partisan agency working for Congress, analyzed 10 years of Department of Education data for its 2022 report , which found that carving new school districts out of existing districts led to districts that tended to have more white and Asian American students than Black and Hispanic students, and were generally wealthier than the districts they broke away from.

“When you have a portion that secedes and that portion that is seceding is the wealthier portion, you are obviously leaving fewer resources for the folks that stay behind,” Nowicki, the GAO director, told FRONTLINE. Fewer resources are linked to worse educational outcomes and typically, less access to experienced teachers.

Sherri Doughty, GAO’s assistant director, also noted the “racial composition of those districts changed” one year after seceding.

From school years 2009-10 through 2019-20, GAO identified 36 school districts that seceded from existing districts.

“Thirteen of those secessions were in the South. Nine of those 13 seceding districts were whiter and wealthier than the districts that they seceded from,” Nowicki said.

She added, “Three of the four that were not whiter and wealthier were under active federal desegregation orders or plans,” referring to the fact that some school districts across the country have been federally mandated to increase the racial integration of Black and Latino students. Many of these orders have been lifted over the years.

“We also saw a lot of secessions in the Northeast, but they were smaller ones,” Doughty said, noting that the school carve outs in the South tended to impact a higher number of students.

Meanwhile, the tensions surrounding St. George’s creation continue, with advocates celebrating the chance at what they say will be a better education for their children and better use of their tax dollars, and opponents fearful that civil rights gains will be eroded.

In early May, a Baton Rouge city councilman who previously sued to prevent the incorporation of St. George requested that the state Supreme Court reverse the ruling.

Days later, Gov. Jeff Landry appointed an interim mayor and interim chief of police for St. George.

Erin Texeira contributed to this story.

Watch the full 2014 documentary Separate and Unequal :

Kaela Malig , Tow Journalism Fellow, FRONTLINE/Columbia Journalism School Fellowship

More stories.

‘A Dangerous Assignment’ Director and Reporter Discuss the Risks in Investigating the Powerful in Maduro’s Venezuela

‘It Would Have Been Easier To Look Away’: A Journalist’s Investigation Into Corruption in Maduro’s Venezuela

FRONTLINE's Reporting on Journalism Under Threat

Risks of Handcuffing Someone Facedown Long Known; People Die When Police Training Fails To Keep Up

Documenting police use of force, get our newsletter, follow frontline, frontline newsletter, we answer to no one but you.

You'll receive access to exclusive information and early alerts about our documentaries and investigations.

I'm already subscribed

The FRONTLINE Dispatch

Don't miss an episode. sign-up for the frontline dispatch newsletter., sign-up for the unresolved newsletter..

Assignment Of Rights Agreement

Jump to section, what is an assignment of rights agreement.

​​An assignment of rights agreement is a written document in which one party, the assignor, assigns to another party all or part of their rights under an existing contract. The most common example of this would be when someone wants to sell their shares of stock in a company.

When you buy shares from someone else (the seller), they agree to transfer them over and give up any control they had on that share. This way, another party can take ownership without going through the trouble of trying to buy the whole company themselves.

Common Sections in Assignment Of Rights Agreements

Below is a list of common sections included in Assignment Of Rights Agreements. These sections are linked to the below sample agreement for you to explore.

Assignment Of Rights Agreement Sample

Reference : Security Exchange Commission - Edgar Database, EX-99.(H)(7) 5 dex99h7.htm FORM OF ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT , Viewed December 20, 2021, View Source on SEC .

Who Helps With Assignment Of Rights Agreements?

Lawyers with backgrounds working on assignment of rights agreements work with clients to help. Do you need help with an assignment of rights agreement?

Post a project  in ContractsCounsel's marketplace to get free bids from lawyers to draft, review, or negotiate assignment of rights agreements. All lawyers are vetted by our team and peer reviewed by our customers for you to explore before hiring.

ContractsCounsel is not a law firm, and this post should not be considered and does not contain legal advice. To ensure the information and advice in this post are correct, sufficient, and appropriate for your situation, please consult a licensed attorney. Also, using or accessing ContractsCounsel's site does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and ContractsCounsel.

Meet some of our Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers

Immigration expert with over 30 years’ experience focused on start-up companies H-1, L-1, E, O-1 visas. PERM and extraordinary ability immigrant visas. Complex family immigration cases and waivers. I also assist early stage comapnies in entity formation and general legal matters for start-up companies in the areas of Telehealth, Technology and International Trade.

A seasoned attorney dedicated to navigating complex legal issues and devising strategic solutions for my clients.

Richard A. Mathurin is as a member of the professional team at Sage Law. Since graduating cum Laude from The University of Notre Dame and UCLA School of Law, Rich has enjoyed an exciting and diversified career in the practice of law. In his early career, he assisted several energy companies all over the world in the development and funding of major wind energy and other green technology projects. Following an assignment by his firm to their Far East offices in Tokyo and Singapore, Rich represented global corporations such as Hitachi, UPS, and Fuji-Xerox in major commercial transactions. More recently, Rich returned to his native San Diego to care for an ill family member and work in the local community. Rich specializes in tax resolution, bankruptcy and small business services helping clients get in compliance with complex tax laws and manage their personal and business finances. When he is not working servicing his valued clients, Rich is an ardent golfer and enjoys rooting for his favorite Boston sports teams.

I proudly hold an active membership with The Florida Bar, I successfully passed the Florida Bar examination in September 2023. My journey into the legal realm began over 5 years ago with dedicated service as a law clerk, where I provided indispensable support at previous law firms. I have distinguished legal expertise in the realm of transational matters. I am highly experienced in entity formations, commercial transactions, mergers & acquisitions, corporate governance & compliance, and business immigration services. I have prepared many independent contractor agreements, employment agreements, purchase and sale agreements, EB-1 and 2 visas, to name a few. I am an adept learner, professional, and committed to high quality legal work.

Ernestas P.

I am a broadly skilled legal professional. I am highly drawn to technology, fintech, intellectual property, privacy law, contracts. I am also experienced in business litigation and business transactions. I have been told to have the following skills perfect time management, critical thinking, problem solving, attention to detail, communication and decision making. As a former flight attendant, I am well versed and acquired many of those skills in a fast faced multicultural/multilingual setting. I am able to work solo or as a team member and quickly adapt to changes. Finally, I am fluent in English, Lithuanian, Russian.

Scott Bowen, Esq brings legal experience in family law, special education law, and healthcare law matters. Scott also has over 20 years of expertise in healthcare compliance, medical coding, and healthcare consulting to the firm.

Damian is a founding partner of Holon Law Partners. He began his career as an officer in the Marine Corps, managing legal affairs for his command in Okinawa, Japan. In this role, he conducted investigations, assembled juries for courts martial, and advised his commander on criminal justice matters. Damian was twice selected to serve as his unit’s liaison to the Japanese government and self-defense forces. Damian later worked as a transactional attorney in New York, where he handled commercial real estate, finance, and restructuring matters. He has also participated in insider trading investigations at the SEC, worked on compliance at a private equity firm, and managed legal operations and special projects at a vertically integrated cannabis company in New Mexico. Damian draws on these diverse experiences to provide his clients with creative solutions to thorny legal issues – from negotiating commercial leases to managing complex securities offerings. In addition to practicing law, Damian volunteers as a research assistant at the University of New Mexico Medical School’s McCormick Lab – studying the microbiology of longevity and aging. When not working, he enjoys spending time with his two pit bulls and pursuing his passions for foreign languages, art, philosophy, and fitness. Damian resides in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Find the best lawyer for your project

Quick, user friendly and one of the better ways I've come across to get ahold of lawyers willing to take new clients.

How It Works

Post Your Project

Get Free Bids to Compare

Hire Your Lawyer

Business lawyers by top cities

• Austin Business Lawyers
• Boston Business Lawyers
• Chicago Business Lawyers
• Dallas Business Lawyers
• Denver Business Lawyers
• Houston Business Lawyers
• Los Angeles Business Lawyers
• New York Business Lawyers
• Phoenix Business Lawyers
• San Diego Business Lawyers
• Tampa Business Lawyers

Assignment Of Rights Agreement lawyers by city

• Austin Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Boston Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Chicago Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Dallas Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Denver Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Houston Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Los Angeles Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• New York Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Phoenix Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• San Diego Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers
• Tampa Assignment Of Rights Agreement Lawyers

Contracts Counsel was incredibly helpful and easy to use. I submitted a project for a lawyer's help within a day I had received over 6 proposals from qualified lawyers. I submitted a bid that works best for my business and we went forward with the project.

I never knew how difficult it was to obtain representation or a lawyer, and ContractsCounsel was EXACTLY the type of service I was hoping for when I was in a pinch. Working with their service was efficient, effective and made me feel in control. Thank you so much and should I ever need attorney services down the road, I'll certainly be a repeat customer.

I got 5 bids within 24h of posting my project. I choose the person who provided the most detailed and relevant intro letter, highlighting their experience relevant to my project. I am very satisfied with the outcome and quality of the two agreements that were produced, they actually far exceed my expectations.

Want to speak to someone?

Get in touch below and we will schedule a time to connect!

Find lawyers and attorneys by city

Milestone Documents

19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Women's Right to Vote (1920)

Citation: Joint Resolution of Congress proposing a constitutional amendment extending the right of suffrage to women, approved June 4, 1919.; Ratified Amendments, 1795-1992; General Records of the United States Government; Record Group 11; National Archives.

View All Pages in the National Archives Catalog

View Transcript

Passed by Congress June 4, 1919, and ratified on August 18, 1920, the 19th amendment granted women the right to vote.

The 19th amendment legally guarantees American women the right to vote. Achieving this milestone required a lengthy and difficult struggle—victory took decades of agitation and protest. Beginning in the mid-19th century, several generations of woman suffrage supporters lectured, wrote, marched, lobbied, and practiced civil disobedience to achieve what many Americans considered a radical change of the Constitution. Few early supporters lived to see final victory in 1920.

Beginning in the 1800s, women organized, petitioned, and picketed to win the right to vote, but it took them decades to accomplish their purpose. Between 1878, when the amendment was first introduced in Congress, and August 18, 1920, when it was ratified, champions of voting rights for women worked tirelessly, but strategies for achieving their goal varied. Some pursued a strategy of passing suffrage acts in each state—nine western states adopted woman suffrage legislation by 1912. Others challenged male-only voting laws in the courts. Some suffragists used more confrontational tactics such as picketing, silent vigils, and hunger strikes. Often supporters met fierce resistance. Opponents heckled, jailed, and sometimes physically abused them.

By 1916, almost all of the major suffrage organizations were united behind the goal of a constitutional amendment. When New York adopted woman suffrage in 1917 and President Wilson changed his position to support an amendment in 1918, the political balance began to shift.

On May 21, 1919, the House of Representatives passed the amendment, and 2 weeks later, the Senate followed. When Tennessee became the 36th state to ratify the amendment on August 18, 1920, the amendment passed its final hurdle of obtaining the agreement of three-fourths of the states. Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby certified the ratification on August 26, 1920, changing the face of the American electorate forever.

The campaign for woman suffrage was long, difficult, and sometimes dramatic; yet ratification did not ensure full enfranchisement. Decades of struggle to include African Americans and other minority women in the promise of voting rights remained. Many women remained unable to vote long into the 20th century because of discriminatory state voting laws.

Teach with this document.

Previous Document Next Document

Sixty-sixth Congress of the United States of America; At the First Session,

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday, the nineteenth day of May, one thousand nine hundred and nineteen.

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution extending the right of suffrage to women.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House concurring therein) , That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislature of three-fourths of the several States.

"ARTICLE ————.

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

[endorsements]

• SI SWIMSUIT
• SI SPORTSBOOK

Houston Astros World Series Winner Takes Turn In Radio Booth

Matthew postins | may 16, 2024.

• Houston Astros

Josh Reddick has found retirement to his liking. The former Houston Astros star, who was part of their 2017 World Series team, lives outside of the Houston area with his family.

But, slowly, he’s been getting his feet wet in broadcasting. This week, Reddick slid into the radio booth to provide analysis alongside play-by-play voice Robert Ford as the Astros faced the Oakland Athletics .

It was an odd convergence. Reddick played for Houston from 2017-20 and for the Athletics from 2012-16, with a short stint with the Los Angeles Dodgers via trade in between.

Reddick has done some pre-game and post-game work with the Space City Home Network, which broadcasts Astros games on local television. But, as he told MLB.com , stepping into the booth to call a game was much harder.

“[Monday] night, I got caught up telling stories,” Reddick said. “Everybody knows me, I love to talk. I just rambled on for a couple of hitters, and even a couple of innings. I’ve got to figure out when to shut up and when to speak up.”

Reddick’s stint will end with the conclusion of the series with the Athletics on Thursday. He joins Jeff Bagwell as former players that have filled in for Sparks this season.

The 37-year-old said that he doesn’t plan on tackling more broadcasting than he’s taking on right now, citing family as the primary reason. He won’t rule out a larger role once his children are older.

Being around them is a priority after a 13-year Major League career that ended in 2021 with Arizona. He was a lifetime .262 hitter. In his first season with Houston in 2017 he batted a career-best .314 with 13 home runs and 82 RBI in 134 games.

MATTHEW POSTINS

Matthew Postins is an award-winning sports journalist who covers the Texas Rangers, Philadelphia Phillies, Chicago Cubs and Houston Astros for Sports Illustrated/FanNation. He also covers he Big 12 for Heartland College Sports.

Follow postinspostcard

Los Angeles Dodgers | Dodgers’ pitching staff continues to get healthy

Share this:.

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)
• High School

Los Angeles Dodgers

Success has been a patchwork quilt of some strong starts, surprising success from a bullpen of interchangeable parts, solid infield defense, with bursts of power and production from the top of the order.

The Dodgers have always touted their depth and it has been key in keeping within reach of teams with the best records in the major leagues.

“I feel good,” Dodgers manager Dave Roberts said. “Certain other guys have had opportunities in the pen; some starters, namely Gavin Stone. Offensively, I think we have been sporadic, certainly top heavy. Some guys around the bottom are on the come.”

Through all of their injuries in the bullpen, including Ryan Brasier, Evan Phillips, Joe Kelly, Brusdar Graterol and Kyle Hurt, the Dodgers still entered play Saturday with a National League-best 3.08 ERA from their relievers. Their 1.06 walks/hits per nine innings also led the NL.

Brasier could be operating out of the bullpen again in as early as a week as he nears the end of his recovery from a right calf strain. Phillips could be close behind as he recovers from a hamstring injury, although Roberts remains wary of setting a timetable.

On the starting rotation side, Bobby Miller threw a bullpen Saturday and is set for a three-inning simulated game next week. A minor league rehab assignment could begin as early as next weekend.

Clayton Kershaw also threw a bullpen Saturday afternoon but did it from the main Dodger Stadium mound as he remains on track for a return after the All-Star break.

“I think at the end of the day, we’re doing a good job of winning baseball games,” Roberts said. “How we do it each night has been different but I think that’s a lot of credit to the coaches and the players.”

BATTERY CHARGER

Mookie Betts was given the day off Saturday, one day after he was down on himself for his defensive play at shortstop. Roberts said the day to rest and relax already had been planned.

“Talking to Mookie, he wants to play every day but I just felt that 13 (games) in a row, it’s a good time,” Roberts said. “It’s a night game before a day game (so) get him back in there tomorrow. Recharge his battery. I think it just keeps him strong and allows him to watch a baseball game tonight.”

Roberts adjusted the lineup simply by moving everybody at the top of the order up one spot. It put Shohei Ohtani in the leadoff spot for the first time this season and the 61st time in his career as a member of the starting lineup.

Los Angeles Dodgers | Walker Buehler leads Dodgers past Reds

Los angeles dodgers | shohei ohtani leads the dodgers to win on his day in l.a..

• Los Angeles Dodgers | Dodgers’ Max Muncy goes to IL, James Outman demoted in series of roster moves
• Los Angeles Dodgers | Reds’ Elly De La Cruz torments Tyler Glasnow, Dodgers
• Los Angeles Dodgers | Dodgers pitcher Emmet Sheehan out for 2024 after elbow surgery

DECISION PENDING

Roberts said a starter for Sunday still has not been decided, with right-hander Landon Knack an option to return from Triple-A Oklahoma City.

Knack made his major league debut on April 17 and held his own by going 1-1 with a 2.81 ERA in three starts before he was returned to the minor leagues.

A spot start or another bullpen day on Sunday will give right-hander Yoshinobu Yamamoto a full week of rest, lining him up to pitch Monday against the Arizona Diamondbacks.

Yamamoto won three consecutive starts with a 0.90 ERA before he gave up four runs in 5 2/3 innings of a no-decision against the San Francisco Giants on Monday.

Notre Dame Sherman Oaks product Hunter Greene is set to take the mound for the Reds on Sunday in his second career start at Dodger Stadium. His outing against the Dodgers on April 16, 2022, was just the second of his promising career when he gave up two earned runs over 5 1/3 innings and took the loss while striking out six.

Reds (RHP Hunter Greene, 2-2, 3.27 ERA) vs. Dodgers (TBA), 1:10 p.m., SportsNet LA, AM 570

• Newsroom Guidelines
• Report an Error

More in Los Angeles Dodgers

SUBSCRIBER ONLY

Los Angeles Dodgers | Dodgers’ Max Muncy goes to IL, James Outman demoted in series of roster moves

Los Angeles Dodgers | Reds’ Elly De La Cruz torments Tyler Glasnow, Dodgers

• Coachella Valley Questions Answered
• Fentanyl Crisis
• Neighborhood Heroes
• Salton Sea Project
• Colorado River Crisis
• I-Team Investigations
• Local Forecast
• First Alert Weather Alert Day
• Live Weather Cams throughout Coachella Valley
• First Alert Weather Insider
• Earthquake Alert
• Photo Galleries
• Coachella Valley Firebirds
• Scholar Athlete of the Week
• Galleri Classic
• High School Football
• Las Posadas
• Fiestas Patrias
• La Poderosa
• Salton Sea: La Agonía de un Paraíso
• St. Jude Dream Home
• Gas Al Mejor Precio
• Quienes Somos
• 2024 Election Results
• Local Politics
• National Politics
• Livestream Special Coverage
• Livestream Newscasts
• Desert Chat
• Do The Right Thing
• Entertainment
• Eye on the Desert
• Healthy Living
• Healthy Pets
• Impact Grants
• Mother’s Day
• One Class at a Time
• Salute To Class Of 2024
• Desert Experts
• CV Golf Card
• Submit Tips, Pics and Video
• Work at KESQ
• Explore Local Jobs
• Intern at KESQ
• Advertise with Us
• KESQ Jobs and Internships
• TV Listings
• CW 5 Palm Springs
• FOX 11 Palm Springs
• Closed Captioning Information
• Download the News Channel 3 News apps
• FCC Public File
• 2023 EEO Report
• 2022 EEO Report
• 2021 EEO Report
• 2020 EEO Report
• 2019 EEO Report
• Public File Help
• Newsletters/Alerts

Angels acquire right-hander Roansy Contreras from Pirates

ANAHEIM, Calif. (AP) — The Los Angeles Angels acquired right-hander Roansy Contreras from the Pittsburgh Pirates for cash on Thursday.

The Pirates designated the 24-year-old Contreras for assignment on Saturday to create room on the roster for Paul Skenes ahead of the prized pitcher’s major league debut against the Chicago Cubs.

Contreras, acquired as part of the trade that sent pitcher Jameson Taillon to the New York Yankees in January 2021, has struggled most of the past two seasons and was out of options. A starter for much of his first three seasons, he has been working out of the bullpen this year. He is 1-0 with a 4.41 ERA in 12 appearances.

Contreras is 9-12 with a 4.83 ERA in 30 starts and 23 relief outings over four big league seasons.

AP MLB: https://apnews.com/MLB

Jump to comments ↓

Associated Press

News Channel 3 is committed to providing a forum for civil and constructive conversation.

Please keep your comments respectful and relevant. You can review our Community Guidelines by clicking here

If you would like to share a story idea, please submit it here .