Brnovich v. Democratic Nat'l Comm.
From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) at 03:07, July 5, 2021. It may differ significantly from current revision.
In Brnovich v. Democratic Nat'l Comm., Nos. 19-1257, 19-1258, 2021 U.S. LEXIS 3568 (July 1, 2021), Justice Sam Alito wrote for 6-3 U.S. Supreme Court to uphold an Arizona election integrity law.
Justice Alito rejected liberal arguments against these good laws:
| “ | We also do not find the disparate-impact model employed in Title VII and Fair Housing Act cases useful here. The text of the relevant provisions of Title VII and the Fair Housing Act differ from that of VRA §2, and it is not obvious why Congress would conform rules regulating voting to those regulating employment and housing. For example, we think it inappropriate to read §2 to impose a strict “necessity requirement” that would force States to demonstrate that their legitimate interests can be accomplished only by means of the voting regulations in question. Stephanopoulos, Disparate Impact, Unified Law, 128 Yale L. J. 1566, 1617-1619 (2019) (advocating such a requirement). Demanding such a tight fit would have the effect of invalidating a great many neutral voting regulations with long pedigrees that are reasonable means of pursuing legitimate interests. It would also transfer much of the authority to regulate election procedures from the States to the federal courts. For those reasons, the Title VII and Fair Housing Act models are unhelpful in §2 cases. | ” |
2021 U.S. LEXIS 3568, at *38-39.
