Skip to content Skip to search

Republish This Story

* Please read before republishing *

We’re happy to make this story available to republish for free under an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives Creative Commons license as long as you follow our republishing guidelines, which require that you credit The 19th and retain our pixel. See our full guidelines for more information.

To republish, simply copy the HTML at right, which includes our tracking pixel, all paragraph styles and hyperlinks, the author byline and credit to The 19th. Have questions? Please email [email protected].

— The Editors

Loading...

Modal Gallery

/
Sign up for our newsletter

Menu

  • Our Mission
  • Our Team
  • Latest Stories
  • Search
  • Upcoming Events
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
  • Donate
  • Work With Us
  • Fellowships
    • From the Collection

      Changing Child Care

      Illustration of a woman feeding a baby a bottle
      • 1 in 4 parents report being fired for work interruptions due to child care breakdowns

        Chabeli Carrazana · February 2
      • Washington, D.C., offers financial relief to local child care workers

        Orion Rummler · September 20
      • As climate change worsens hurricane season in Louisiana, doulas are ensuring parents can safely feed their babies

        Jessica Kutz · May 5
    • From the Collection

      Next-Gen GOP

      Illustration of a woman riding an elephant
      • Mayra Flores’ victory set a record for women in Congress. It also reflects the growing visibility of Republican Latinas

        Candice Norwood · June 21
      • A banner year for Republican women

        Amanda Becker · November 11
      • Republican women could double representation in the U.S. House

        Amanda Becker · November 4
    • From the Collection

      On The Rise

      Illustration of three women marching
      • Can Cheri Beasley build a winning coalition in North Carolina?

        Candice Norwood · October 11
      • Los Angeles has never elected a woman mayor. Karen Bass hopes to change that.

        Nadra Nittle · September 8
      • Judge J. Michelle Childs is confirmed to D.C. appeals court

        Candice Norwood · July 20
    • From the Collection

      Pandemic Within a Pandemic

      Illustration of four people marching for Black Lives Matter with coronavirus as the backdrop
      • Some LGBTQ+ people worry that the COVID-19 vaccine will affect HIV medication. It won’t.

        Orion Rummler · November 23
      • Why are more men dying from COVID? It’s a complicated story of nature vs. nurture, researchers say

        Mariel Padilla · September 22
      • Few incarcerated women were released during COVID. The ones who remain have struggled.

        Candice Norwood · August 17
    • From the Collection

      Portraits of a Pandemic

      Illustration of a woman wearing a mask and holding up the coronavirus
      • For family caregivers, COVID is a mental health crisis in the making

        Shefali Luthra · October 8
      • A new database tracks COVID-19’s effects on sex and gender

        Shefali Luthra · September 15
      • Pregnant in a pandemic: The 'perfect storm for a crisis'

        Shefali Luthra · August 25
    • From the Collection

      The 19th Explains

      People walking from many articles to one article where they can get the context they need on an issue.
      • The 19th Explains: What we know about Brittney Griner’s case and what it took to get her home

        Candice Norwood, Katherine Gilyard · December 8
      • The 19th Explains: Why the Respect for Marriage Act doesn’t codify same-sex marriage rights

        Kate Sosin · December 8
      • The 19th Explains: Why baby formula is still hard to find months after the shortage

        Mariel Padilla · December 1
    • From the Collection

      The Electability Myth

      Illustration of three women speaking at podiums
      • Mayra Flores’ victory set a record for women in Congress. It also reflects the growing visibility of Republican Latinas

        Candice Norwood · June 21
      • Stepping in after tragedy: How political wives became widow lawmakers

        Mariel Padilla · May 24
      • Do term limits help women candidates? New York could be a new testing ground

        Barbara Rodriguez · January 11
    • From the Collection

      The Impact of Aging

      A number of older people walking down a path of information.
      • From ballroom dancing to bloodshed, the older AAPI community grapples with gun control

        Nadra Nittle, Mariel Padilla · January 27
      • 'I'm planning on working until the day I die': Older women voters are worried about the future

        Mariel Padilla · June 3
      • Climate change is forcing care workers to act as first responders

        Jessica Kutz · May 31
    • From the Collection

      Voting Rights

      A series of hands reaching for ballots.
      • Election workers believe in our system — and want everyone else to, too

        Barbara Rodriguez, Jennifer Gerson · November 8
      • Voter ID laws stand between transgender people, women and the ballot box

        Barbara Rodriguez · October 14
      • Emily’s List expands focus on diverse candidates and voting rights ahead of midterm elections

        Errin Haines · August 30

    View all collections

  • Explore by Topic

    • 19th Polling
    • Abortion
    • Business & Economy
    • Caregiving
    • Coronavirus
    • Education
    • Election 2020
    • Election 2022
    • Environment & Climate
    • Health
    • Immigration
    • Inside The 19th
    • Justice
    • LGBTQ+
    • Politics
    • Press Release
    • Race
    • Sports
    • Technology

    View All Topics

Home
  • Our Mission
  • Our Team
  • Latest Stories
  • Search
  • Upcoming Events
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
  • Donate
  • Work With Us
  • Fellowships

We’re an independent, nonprofit newsroom reporting on gender, politics and policy. Read our story.

The 19th News(letter)

News from reporters who represent you and your communities.

You have been subscribed!

Submitting...

Uh-oh! Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Become a member

The 19th thanks our sponsors. Become one.

US Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan.
(Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Politics

Justice Kagan warns Supreme Court has weakened voting protections at ‘perilous moment’

Her dissent is a civics lesson about voting in America when you’re not a White man.

Amanda Becker

Washington Correspondent

Amanda Becker portrait

Published

2021-07-01 14:04
2:04
July 1, 2021
pm

Updated

2021-07-01 17:32:00.000000
America/New_York

Share

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email

The Supreme Court’s decision on Thursday to make it easier for states to enact voting restrictions comes at a “perilous moment” when many Republican-led states are pursuing new laws that will “predictably deprive members of minority groups equal access to the ballot box,” Justice Elena Kagan writes in a scathing dissent.

In a 6-3 ruling by the court in a case called Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, the court’s conservatives, led by Justice Samuel Alito, sided with Arizona that two of its laws related to the casting and collection of ballots did not violate a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, a 1965 law prohibiting racial discrimination in voting. 

The dissent offered by Kagan, who was joined by fellow liberal Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor, reads as a civics lesson about the myriad of ways that White men, from before the Civil War until the present, have had advantages at the ballot box — and the “predictable consequences” that will befall Black, Latinx and indigenous voters after their colleagues’ “tragic” decision to further weaken the law meant to protect them. 

The 19th thanks our sponsors. Become one.

“If a single statute represents the best of America, it is the Voting Rights Act. It marries two great ideals: democracy and racial equality,” Kagan writes.

“If a single statute reminds us of the worst of America, it is the Voting Rights Act. Because it was — and remains — so necessary,” she adds. 

Stories by experienced reporters you can trust and relate to.

Delivered directly to your inbox every weekday.

You have been subscribed!

Submitting…

Uh-oh! Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Leah Litman, a constitutional law professor at the University of Michigan, agreed with the dissenting justices that Thursday’s ruling “all but eviscerated the remaining protections” of the Voting Rights Act. It provides conservative courts with a “set of weapons” to “wipe out” future claims that voting laws have discriminatory impacts, she said. 

The Brnovich v. DNC case concerns two Arizona election laws: one that invalidates ballots cast by voters in incorrect precincts even if they are eligible to vote generally; and another that all but ended the practice of third parties collecting and dropping off batches of ballots during early voting. The DNC sued in 2016, saying both laws have a disproportionate impact on the state’s racial minority voters that violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. A trial judge sided with Arizona, the DNC appealed, and the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed, prompting Arizona to appeal to the Supreme Court. 

States have passed a slew of voting laws in recent years that, until the Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling in Shelby County v. Holder, would have required “preclearance” by the Justice Department if they were in a state or locality with a history of racial discrimination.

The court’s conservative majority found in the Shelby County case that Congress had not appropriately updated the formula used to determine which areas were subject to preclearance when the Voting Rights Act was last renewed in 2006. The preclearance provision, formally called Section 5, was tossed out. Civil rights attorneys and voting right advocates have since relied on Section 2 to challenge potentially discriminatory voting laws. 

The Voting Rights Act’s Section 2 prohibits laws and policies that intentionally discriminate on the basis of race, as well as laws that have a disproportionate impact on voters of color, regardless of intent. 

“Today, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a decision that will undoubtedly restrict the right to vote, and in particular, for voters of color,” said Vice President Kamala Harris, who was California’s 32nd attorney general.

“This is the second time in the last eight years that the Supreme Court has dismantled crucial protections of the Voting Rights Act,” added Harris, whose White House portfolio includes voting rights.

The court’s conservative justices on Thursday “listed a set of factors” that must be met to prove a Section 2 claim that will make it “exceedingly, if not prohibitively, difficult for plaintiffs to win these challenges,” Litman said.

“The mere fact there is some disparity in impact does not necessarily mean that a system is not equally open or that it does not give everyone an equal opportunity to vote,” Alito writes for the majority.

Kagan counters that the language in the Voting Rights Act is clear: “Courts are to strike down voting rules that contribute to a racial disparity in the opportunity to vote, taking all the relevant circumstances into account.”

It is these relevant circumstances that Kagan discusses at length in her dissent, which describes how “drafters of the Voting Rights Act understood that ‘social and historical conditions,’ including disparities in education, wealth, and employment, often affect opportunities to vote.”

For most of the century after the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776, the democratic tenets it sets out, including the right to vote, only applied to White men, Kagan writes, saying the “earliest state election laws excluded from the franchise African Americans, Native Americans, women and those without property.”

The Supreme Court’s 1857 decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford that citizenship rights did not extend Black Americans was its “most deplorable,” Kagan writes, adding that many states, particularly in the U.S. South, continued to suppress the Black vote through a “dizzying array of methods: literacy tests, poll taxes, registration requirements and property qualifications.”

In 1965, the year the Voting Rights Act overcame a Senate filibuster and was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson — who had asked Congress to write the “goddamnedest toughest voting rights act that you can devise” — only 27 percent of eligible Black people in Georgia were registered to vote, only 19 percent in Alabama and just 7 percent in Mississippi. 

Between 1965 and 1970, nearly as many Black people registered to vote in six states in the U.S. South as had registered in the entire 100 years preceding the Voting Rights Act’s passage, Kagan notes. 

“Much of the Voting Rights Act’s success lay in its capacity to meet ever-new forms of discrimination … and for decades, Section 5 operated as intended,” Kagan writes, adding that between 1965 and 2006 the Justice Department blocked 1,200 voting laws it had found would have a discriminatory impact. 

But in the years since the Shelby County ruling, states have passed dozens of laws, some of which previously may have been stopped before taking effect, and voters have thereby been disenfranchised, she writes.

  • More from The 19th
    Stacey Abrams speaks at a podium.
  • Stacey Abrams group activating tool for Georgia voters to check if they are about to be purged
  • Six decades after Freedom Rides, activist says work isn’t done

Former President Donald Trump’s erroneous claims that voter fraud cost him the election have further fueled skepticism about our electoral process, and that skepticism has prompted elected officials in mostly Republican-led states to propose a flurry of new restrictions on voting this year that range from stricter identification laws to the removal of names from voter-registration lists. 

As of June 21, 17 states had enacted 28 new laws that restrict voting access, including two more in Arizona, according to the nonprofit Brennan Center for Justice.

The previously passed Arizona laws at issue in Thursday’s ruling both disproportionately affected voting access for voters of color, the dissenting justices said, echoing claims made by the DNC, Arizona’s Democratic Secretary of State Katie Hobbs and voting-rights groups. Kagan notes that in 2016, Latinx, Black and Native American voters in Arizona were twice as likely to have their ballots discarded as White voters were. 

Some Republicans in the U.S. Congress, Arizona’s Republican Gov. Doug Ducey and conservative-leaning advocacy organizations sided with Arizona’s Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich. 

In Arizona, some voters cast ballots at assigned precincts and others at county-wide voting centers. The state’s law invalidating otherwise valid ballots cast in the wrong precincts resulted in ballots cast by Latinx, Native American and Black voters being tossed out at higher rates. Arizona’s prohibition on ballot collection and submission by most third parties makes it disproportionately more difficult for the state’s Native American voters, who are more likely than White voters to live in remote areas that do not have access to the U.S. mail service.

“Make no mistake, it is not ‘very easy’ for Black, Latinx and Native Americans to vote in and beyond Arizona,” said Judith Browne Dianis, executive director of the Advancement Project, a liberal nonprofit focused on racial justice issues. 

Alito opens the majority opinion by stating that “Arizona law generally makes it very easy to vote.”

In 2020, Joe Biden was the first Democratic presidential candidate to carry Arizona since Bill Clinton did in 1996, but he only beat Trump there by about 10,000 votes — critical to his victory was a coalition of women made up of energized liberals, Latinas, indigenous activists and disaffected suburbanites.

“That is fewer votes than Arizona discarded under the out-of-precinct policy in two of the prior three presidential elections,” Kagan writes in arguing that Arizona’s laws result in a “statistically significant” disparity. 

“The court decides this Voting Rights Act case at a perilous moment for the nation’s commitment to equal citizenship. It decides this case in an era of voting-rights retrenchment — when too many states and localities are restricting access to voting in ways that will predictably deprive members of minority groups of equal access to the ballot box,” Kagan argues.  

At the end of the dissent, Kagan notes that Congress, not the courts, should decide if and when Section 2 should be eliminated or otherwise reworked. The Voting Rights Act “confronted one of this country’s most enduring wrongs” and pledged to “give every American, of every race, an equal chance to participate in our democracy … that law, of all laws, should not be diminished by this court,” she writes. 

The Brnovich decision comes just one week after a sweeping Democratic bill to protect and expand voting access stalled in the evenly split U.S. Senate, where most legislation needs 60 votes to overcome procedural hurdles, making a path forward unlear. Democrats are planning to hold a series of field hearings in the coming weeks, beginning in Georgia, which has enacted one of the most stringent new voting laws in the country. 

Litman said the end of Kagan’s dissent is a message that “Congress has to pass a new law, because the court just gutted the one we have.”

“You need to pass a new law and you need to insulate it from being gutted or invalidated by this court, that is the only option on the table,” Litman said.

Share

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Email

Help sustain what we started

Your monthly investment is critical to our sustainability as a nonprofit newsroom.

Donate Today

Become a member

From the Collection

Voting Rights

A series of hands reaching for ballots.
  • Election workers believe in our system — and want everyone else to, too

    Barbara Rodriguez, Jennifer Gerson · November 8
  • Voter ID laws stand between transgender people, women and the ballot box

    Barbara Rodriguez · October 14
  • Emily’s List expands focus on diverse candidates and voting rights ahead of midterm elections

    Errin Haines · August 30

Up Next

Nikole Hannah-Jones addressed graduates at Morehouse College on May 16, 2021

Race

Nikole Hannah-Jones’ delayed UNC tenure offer highlights political battle over critical race theory

Her 1619 Project is at the center of a debate about what public-school students can learn about race in America.

Read the Story

The 19th
The 19th is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization. Our stories are free to republish in accordance with these guidelines.

  • Donate
  • Newsletter
  • Events
  • Search
  • Jobs
  • Fellowships
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Community Guidelines
  • Membership
  • Membership FAQ
  • Major Gifts
  • Sponsorship
  • Privacy
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram