The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, a lawsuit challenging Arizona’s out-of-precinct policy on Election Day, which does not count provisional ballots cast in person that were cast outside of the voter’s designated precinct and its ballot-collection law, which permits only certain persons to handle another person’s completed early ballot. The lawsuit contends these laws violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
While redistricting maps are often challenged for minority vote dilution under Section 2 of the Act, this case involves claims of vote denial as opposed to vote dilution and centers around the appropriate test for determining if an election rule or procedure violates the Act. The Supreme Court’s decision on this case, however, could strengthen or weaken the statute’s role in election lawsuits going forward.
MARCH 2, 2021 (Video courtesy of C-SPAN)
Brnovich v. DNC Consolidated Oral Argument
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, a consolidated case on the legality of two Arizona voting laws. Both prohibit voter ballots submitted at incorrect precincts and third-party collection of ballots, often referred to as “ballot harvesting” by critics. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that these restrictions negatively impact minority voters and as such is in violation of the federal Voting Rights Act
