The Supreme Court is poised to decide whether new restrictions on voting rights in Arizona are discriminatory, a case that could have far-reaching implications for election laws nationwide. This follows a 2013 decision that significantly weakened the Voting Rights Act, and comes amid a surge in Republican-led efforts to tighten voting access across the country.
Arizona’s restrictions, enacted in 2016, limit who can collect and return early ballots for others, a practice often used by minority and elderly voters. The law also discards ballots cast in the wrong precinct, potentially disenfranchising voters who may be confused by precinct changes or complex districting. These measures are being challenged under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination in voting.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the Arizona law, finding that it disproportionately affects minority voters. However, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich argues the case centers on ballot integrity, not discrimination. The Supreme Court will hear arguments on Tuesday, conducted remotely due to the ongoing pandemic.
The Heart of the Matter: Proving Discrimination
This case focuses on how plaintiffs can demonstrate discrimination under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Specifically, it examines how courts should weigh the disparate impact of voting laws on minority communities against the state’s justifications for those laws. A broad Supreme Court ruling in favor of Arizona could significantly raise the bar for proving discriminatory intent or effect, making it harder to challenge similar restrictions in other states.
A Backdrop of Increased Voting Restrictions
The Arizona case unfolds against the backdrop of a wave of new voting restrictions introduced in Republican-controlled legislatures following the 2020 election. Fueled by unsubstantiated claims of widespread voter fraud, these measures often target methods like early voting and mail-in ballots, which saw increased usage during the pandemic. Critics argue these restrictions disproportionately impact voters of color.
The Legacy of the 2013 Voting Rights Act Decision
The Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder effectively gutted Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which required certain jurisdictions with a history of discrimination to obtain preclearance before implementing changes to voting procedures. This ruling paved the way for the current wave of voting restrictions, as states are no longer subject to the same level of federal oversight.
The Role of the Biden Administration
The Justice Department, under the Biden administration, has taken a nuanced stance. While acknowledging that Arizona’s measures might not violate Section 2, the administration has expressed concerns about the legal reasoning used by the previous administration to defend the restrictions. This subtle shift could offer the Supreme Court a path to uphold the Arizona law without drastically altering voting rights jurisprudence.
Business Leaders Weigh In
Adding to the complexity of the case, nearly 75 businesses, including prominent companies like PayPal, Levi Strauss, and Impossible Foods, have filed a brief urging the court to uphold the Voting Rights Act. Their involvement underscores the growing recognition of voting rights as a crucial element of a healthy democracy and a stable business environment.
Implications for the Future of Voting Rights
The Supreme Court’s decision in this case, expected by early summer, will have significant consequences for the future of voting rights in the United States. A ruling that weakens Section 2 could embolden states to enact further restrictions, potentially disenfranchising millions of voters, particularly in minority communities. Conversely, a decision upholding the lower court’s ruling could offer a crucial safeguard against discriminatory voting practices.
A Timeline of Key Events
- 2013: Supreme Court weakens Voting Rights Act in Shelby County v. Holder.
- 2016: Arizona enacts restrictions on ballot collection and out-of-precinct voting.
- 2020: Surge in early and mail-in voting due to the pandemic, followed by widespread claims of voter fraud.
- 2021: Supreme Court hears arguments in the Arizona voting rights case.
The Stakes Are High
The Arizona case represents a pivotal moment for voting rights in America. The Supreme Court’s decision will determine whether Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act remains a robust tool for combating discrimination or becomes another casualty in the ongoing battle over access to the ballot box. The eyes of the nation are on the court as it grapples with this crucial issue.
!(https://storage.googleapis.com/www-courttv-uploads/2021/03/7a80012a-ap21058743343581-300×200.jpg)
Maricopa County election officials counting ballots in 2020. The Supreme Court’s decision in the Arizona case could impact similar election procedures nationwide.
Conclusion: A Critical Juncture for American Democracy
The Supreme Court’s upcoming decision on the Arizona voting laws represents a crucial juncture for American democracy. The ruling will significantly impact the future of voting rights and the ability to challenge discriminatory practices. With a wave of new voting restrictions sweeping the nation, the court’s interpretation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act will determine whether this vital protection remains a robust shield against disenfranchisement or becomes another casualty in the ongoing struggle for equal access to the ballot box. The outcome of this case will undoubtedly shape the landscape of American elections for years to come. Stay informed and exercise your right to vote.
