How did Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee interpret Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act?

Created from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.

A person ascends the steps of the west facade of the United States Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C., with its tall columns and a round fountain in the foreground. — Major Supreme Court Cases from the 2025–26 Term The west facade of the U.S. Supreme Court building, Washington, D.C.

In Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee (2021), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that state voting restrictions do not necessarily violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) even if they disproportionately burden racial minorities.1

The Court interpreted Section 2 by asserting that subsection (a)’s prohibition on discriminatory results must be read in conjunction with subsection (b), which requires that a state’s voting system as a whole be "equally open" to all groups. The majority argued that a violation is only established if, based on the "totality of circumstances," a rule limits voting opportunities such that participation is less open to minorities than to other citizens.1

To assess these claims, the Court established five "guideposts":
* The size of the burden imposed, specifically if it exceeds the usual effort of voting.1
* The extent to which the rule departs from practices standard in 1982.1
* The size of any racial disparity in the burden.1
* The range of voting opportunities provided by the system as a whole.1
* The strength of the state interest served, such as preventing voter fraud.1