On Thursday, the Supreme Court saved the Voting Rights Act.
That’s not what you’re hearing in most of the media, but it’s true. The court prevented the important civil rights law from becoming a partisan tool as Democratic National Committee lawyer Marc Elias and other leftist groups had hoped. The court rejected their effort to graft disparate impact theories onto a law that was designed to protect real-world impediments to the ballot box.
At issue was Arizona’s ballot harvesting law that protected voters by limiting who could possess their mail ballots. The court not only upheld the Arizona voter protection but also obliterated the effort of activists to pervert the law.
In an opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito, the Supreme Court put clear guidelines into the Voting Rights Act and held that disparate impact theories, of the sort used to allow statistics to find liability for racial discrimination in housing or employment cases, had no role in a challenge to a state election integrity law.