The US Supreme Court is set to issue its opinion today on a case that could have a major impact on the future of voting rights in the country. The case, Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, challenges two Arizona laws that restrict how ballots are cast and counted.
The first law requires election officials to discard ballots that are cast in the wrong precinct, even if the voter is eligible to vote in the state. The second law bans third parties, such as community groups or political parties, from collecting and delivering mail-in ballots for voters, a practice known as ballot harvesting.
The Democratic National Committee and other civil rights groups sued Arizona, arguing that the laws disproportionately affect minority voters, who are more likely to vote in the wrong precinct or rely on ballot collection services. They claim that the laws violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits voting practices that result in racial discrimination.
Arizona, backed by the Republican National Committee and 18 other states, defended the laws as necessary to prevent fraud and ensure election integrity. They argue that Section 2 does not apply to generally applicable voting rules that do not target specific racial groups, and that the laws do not impose a significant burden on voting.
The case Is one of the most important voting rights cases in decades, as it will determine how courts interpret and apply Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which is the main tool to challenge discriminatory voting laws in the absence of federal preclearance. Preclearance was a provision of the Voting Rights Act that required certain states and localities with a history of discrimination to obtain federal approval before changing their voting laws. However, the Supreme Court struck down the formula for determining which jurisdictions were subject to preclearance in 2013, effectively gutting the provision.
The case also comes amid a wave of Republican-led efforts to enact new voting restrictions in the wake of the 2020 presidential election, which former President Donald Trump and his allies falsely claimed was marred by widespread fraud. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonpartisan think tank, more than 250 bills to restrict voting access have been introduced in 43 states this year.
The Supreme Court’s ruling on the Arizona case could either uphold or undermine these efforts, depending on how broadly or narrowly it defines what constitutes a violation of Section 2. Voting rights advocates fear that a ruling in favor of Arizona could embolden more states to pass laws that make it harder for minority voters to cast their ballots, while a ruling in favor of the DNC could deter or invalidate such laws.
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case on March 2, and is expected to announce its decision today, the last day of its current term. The court’s conservative majority, which includes three justices appointed by Trump, could tip the balance in favor of Arizona, while the court’s liberal minority, which includes the only two justices of color, could side with the DNC.
Whatever the outcome, the case is likely to spark intense debate and controversy over the state of democracy and racial justice in the US, and could influence the outcome of future elections. However, some experts and activists also point out that the case is not the end of the fight for voting rights, and that Congress could pass legislation to restore and expand the protections of the Voting Rights Act, such as the For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, which are currently pending in the Senate.
Source: Bloomberg
