Electoral laws have become a dangerous political hotspot, as Americans learned the hard way recently. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear a potentially landmark case (Brnovich v. DNC) that offers an opportunity to restore the proxy law to its original purpose.
It is about Arizona’s demand that voters cast ballots in their assigned district on election day and the ban on voting by outside groups. A majority of states require a turf vote, and about 20 restrict ballot harvesting, allowing third parties to collect ballot papers in bundles. Both rules are intended to strengthen the integrity of the ballot papers.
Democrats say this violates Section 2 of the Suffrage Act, which prohibits states from adopting electoral qualifications, standards or practices that result in denial or curtailment of voting rights “based on race or color”. However, they provide no evidence that Arizona rules limit access to minority votes.
Congress passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to prevent states from disenfranchising blacks using underhand methods such as poll taxes and literacy tests. But Democrats are now arguing that any government regulation that makes it a little harder for everyone to vote is against the law – even if it applies to minorities and whites alike.
It is important that the Voting Rights Act (VRA) places the burden on plaintiffs of showing that minorities have “less opportunity” than others to “participate in the political process and vote for representatives of their choice because of the“ totality of circumstances ”. ”
