What was the outcome of Shelby County v. Holder in 2013?

The outcome of Shelby County v. Holder in 2013 primarily revolved around the legality of a specific provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Supreme Court ruled that the formula used to determine which jurisdictions were required to seek federal approval before making changes to their voting laws was outdated and unconstitutional, effectively nullifying the requirement for such federal oversight in states with histories of racial discrimination in voting practices. This decision significantly weakened the federal government's ability to monitor and prevent voter suppression in those jurisdictions.

This ruling was pivotal because it allowed states that had previously been required to receive federal approval for changes to voting procedures to implement new laws without such oversight. As a result, in many instances, states moved quickly to change their voting laws, which some argued could lead to voter suppression, particularly affecting minority populations.

While the other options touch on various aspects of voting rights, they do not pertain directly to the legal findings of the Shelby County case. The case did not uphold the provisions of the Voting Rights Act, expand voting rights to undocumented immigrants, or mandate changes in how states manage early voting, making the focus on the removal of federal approval for voting law changes the most accurate interpretation of the ruling's significance.