The Supreme Court issued its decision in Brnovich (v. DNC) on Thursday. This effectively dismantles the Voting Rights act. This latest decision in Brnovich v. DNC is yet another blow against equal suffrage and the latest in a long list of decisions that have allowed voter suppression laws to be approved. Everyone should now know that the Supreme Court's conservative supermajority opposes the franchise. Brnovich is a scourge of the reactionary SCOTUS decisions. We have created a system to contextualize the Supreme Court ruling. It ranks opinions against each other based on three criteria: radicalness and cruelty.AdvertisementAdvertisementAdvertisementSubscribe to the Slatest Newsletter Get a daily email update with the latest stories. Signing you up was not possible due to an error Please try again. To use this form, please enable jаvascript. Email address: I would like to receive updates on Slate special offers. You agree to our Privacy Policy & Terms by signing up. Thank you for signing up! You can cancel your subscription at any time.Brnovich focuses on the heart of today's VRA: Section 2's results test. The VRA, like the 15th Amendment bans voting restrictions that are racist in intent. However, Congress recognized that legislators seldom admit to trying to prevent racial minorities voting. In 1982, Congress added the results test to the law, which prohibits any law that restricts or denies the right of a person to vote based on race. This test clarifies the fact that all races must have equal access to vote and that racial minority voters should also be able to participate in an election.AdvertisementCourts have held that this test has been meaning what it says for years: Any law that disproportionately restricts the rights of racial minorities to vote is against the VRA. An appeals court overturned a Texas voter ID requirement, which made it significantly more difficult for Black and Latino voters to vote according to the VRAs results. Justice Sam Alito, however, rewrote the test in Brnovich to strip it of any power. Alito argued that voter suppression laws that have a disproportionate effect on racial minority groups are not necessarily illegal. Instead, laws that violate the results test are generally legal as long as minorities have another opportunity to vote. Alito also argued that courts should assume that laws in force today that were prevalent in 1982 are still legal. Brnovich almost guarantees that states will not be able to restrict absentee and early voting as most states did in 1982.AdvertisementAdvertisementJustice Elena Kagan, in her dissent, condemned Alitos opinion of a law-free area. With an empty promise, the court overturned the VRAa law that was passed with overwhelming bipartisan support from the democratic branches. It did this at a time when too many states and localities were restricting voting access in ways that will predictably deprive minority groups of equal access to vote. It is not as radical as Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court's most recent major blow to the VRA. The Shelby County court created an incoherent constitutional principle that ripped out the heart of law. It required that any new voting restrictions in historically-racist states be approved by the Justice Department. The VRA was almost crushed by Shelby County. Brnovich was essentially done with the job.AdvertisementAdvertisementBrnovich is openly pro-Republican legislators who are racing to limit access to the ballot after the 2020 election. It will quickly reverberate throughout minority communities, particularly those in GOP-controlled States like Arizona and Georgia. Under the pretext that fraud prevention was being considered, the court granted lawmakers much greater freedom to target minority voters. Judges are now able to uphold laws that prohibit non-white voters from casting their ballot. Many stories have been told of Black and Brown Americans disenfranchised due to the Brnovich-approved laws. Many lack the documentation required to obtain an ID and are therefore denied the right to vote. Jim Crow states did not care about Black people's vital records and so many elderly Black Americans cannot get this documentation. They are therefore unable to vote. The Supreme Court said to them: Too bad.AdvertisementAlthough the cruelty is not the main point, it is an outcome of conservative justices' cynical attitude towards voter suppression measures. Brnovich is not as brutal as Bowers v. Hardwick which upheld criminalization of homosexuality; it's about the same as Ledbetter V. Goodyear which created a loophole in laws that require equal pay for women. Although Congress overturned Ledbetter's decision through legislation, it is unlikely that Congress will do so for Brnovich. Therefore, we deem Thursday's decision fairly criminal.AdvertisementAlthough the impact of Shelby County was severe, it was limited to areas covered by preclearancenine state and multiple counties in many other states. Brnovich has a broad impact on the country. The VRAs results testing is applicable nationwide. This is why it has been so effective in fighting voter suppression. SCOTUS dismantled it and has deprived millions of Americans this vital protection. Meanwhile, Republicans rush to end the right to vote. This will have an cumulative effect on millions of Americans across the country. The Supreme Court has ensured that most, if not all, of these GOP measures will be able to withstand legal challenges. Brnovich has a much greater impact than the recent Burwell v. Hobby Lobby cases, which only affected employees of contraceptive-resistant companies. There are tens of thousands of minorities that may face greater barriers to the ballot. Brnovich will impact a LOT of people.
