How did they dress up and behave as models for their photos? Why wasn’t there any public outrage about them in the ’60s and ’70s?
To answer all of those questions, we talked to a team of historians, anthropologists and art historians at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum.
So, what did the flappers’ costumes mean for the way women thought about what a woman wore?
In a letter dated June 6 and obtained by TIME, the Supreme Court has rejected the appeal of a federal district judge who struck down Indiana’s strict voter ID law.
In a 7-2 opinion, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority dismissed the voter registration application of a man who registered to vote and subsequently lost his right to vote under Indiana law. “Indiana’s strict voter photo ID law, which, by its own terms, is a poll tax, was enacted to increase turnout among eligible Hoosiers and disfranchise ineligible voters,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote. “And in doing so, it disenfranchised many of the voters the law would have helped.”
The majority’s opinion did not address the merits of the case; that is a decision about whether Indiana’s ID laws are necessary and constitutionally permissible. But the decision’s timing — just days before the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments on a case about the Voting Rights Act and redistricting — is significant, at least for voting rights advocates. That case concerns whether Congress should have intervened to correct a 2010 court decision that struck down strict voting laws in North Carolina.
What Alito’s majority opinion does say is that the Supreme Court is not bound by the Supreme Court’s decisions, which cannot “hinder the exercise of federal power.” The majority goes on to explain that the Supreme Court has no obligation to decide the merits of this particular case, and does not have jurisdiction even if it did. The majority goes on to explain that the issue of whether voter ID should be required for federal elections “has been a matter of heated national debate,” and “a case that is not ripe for decision.” It concludes its opinion with, “This Court is unable to address this question in its present cases, for reasons I believe self-evident.”
The fact that the Supreme Court is unable to decide the merits means that some of the most hotly contentious parts of the Voting Rights Act’s coverage formula — where a discriminatory provision (like one that requires government-issued ID to vote) is challenged in a court that determines it to be unconstitutional
flapper inspired outfit, diy flapper dress, retro costumes, 1920’2 dresses, 20s style flapper dresses