Sec. 101. Vote dilution, denial, and abridgment claims
1,201 words·~5 min read·
/bill/119/s/2523/is/section-101A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
Section 2(a) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 ( 52 U.S.C. 10301(a) ) is amended— by inserting after applied by any State or political subdivision the following: for the purpose of, or ; and by striking as provided in subsection
(b)and inserting as provided in subsection (b), (c), (d), or
(e). Section 2 of such Act ( 52 U.S.C. 10301 ), as amended by subsection (a), is further amended by striking subsection
(b)and inserting the following: A violation of subsection
(a)for vote dilution is established if, based on the totality of circumstances, it is shown that the political processes leading to nomination or election in the State or political subdivision are not equally open to participation by members of a class of citizens protected by subsection
(a)in that its members have less opportunity than other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice. The extent to which members of a protected class have been elected to office in the State or political subdivision is one circumstance which may be considered: Provided, That nothing in this section establishes a right to have members of a protected class elected in numbers equal to their proportion in the population. The legal standard articulated in Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986), governs claims under this subsection. For purposes of this subsection a class of citizens protected by subsection
(a)may include a cohesive coalition of members of different racial or language minority groups. . Section 2 of such Act ( 52 U.S.C. 10301 ), as amended by subsections
(a)and (b), is further amended by adding at the end the following: A violation of subsection
(a)for vote denial or abridgment is established if the challenged standard, practice, or procedure imposes a discriminatory burden on members of a class of citizens protected by subsection (a), meaning that— members of the protected class face greater difficulty in complying with the standard, practice, or procedure, considering the totality of the circumstances; and such greater difficulty is, at least in part, caused by or linked to social and historical conditions that have produced or currently produce discrimination against members of the protected class. The challenged standard, practice, or procedure need only be a but-for cause of the discriminatory burden or perpetuate a pre-existing discriminatory burden. The totality of the circumstances for consideration relative to a violation of subsection
(a)for vote denial or abridgment shall include the following factors, which, individually and collectively, show how a voting standard, practice, or procedure can function to amplify the effects of past or present racial discrimination: The history of official voting-related discrimination in the State or political subdivision. The extent to which voting in the elections of the State or political subdivision is racially polarized. The extent to which the State or political subdivision has used unduly burdensome photographic voter identification requirements, documentary proof of citizenship requirements, documentary proof of residence requirements, or other voting standards, practices, or procedures beyond those required by Federal law that may impair the ability of members of the protected class to participate fully in the political process. The extent to which members of the protected class bear the effects of discrimination in areas such as education, employment, and health, which hinder the ability of those members to participate effectively in the political process. The use of overt or subtle racial appeals either in political campaigns or surrounding the adoption or maintenance of the challenged standard, practice, or procedure. The extent to which members of the protected class have been elected to public office in the jurisdiction, except that the fact that the protected class is too small to elect candidates of its choice shall not defeat a claim of vote denial or abridgment under this section. Whether there is a lack of responsiveness on the part of elected officials to the particularized needs of members of the protected class. Whether the policy underlying the State or political subdivision's use of the challenged qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure has a tenuous connection to that qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure. A particular combination or number of factors under subparagraph
(A)shall not be required to establish a violation of subsection
(a)for vote denial or abridgment. The totality of the circumstances for consideration relative to a violation of subsection
(a)for vote denial or abridgment shall not include the following factors: The total number or share of members of a protected class on whom a challenged standard, practice, or procedure does not impose a material burden. The degree to which the challenged standard, practice, or procedure has a long pedigree or was in widespread use at some earlier date. The use of an identical or similar standard, practice, or procedure in other States or political subdivisions. The availability of other forms of voting unimpacted by the challenged standard, practice, or procedure to all members of the electorate, including members of the protected class, unless the State or political subdivision is simultaneously expanding those other standards, practices, or procedures to eliminate any disproportionate burden imposed by the challenged standard, practice, or procedure. A prophylactic impact on potential criminal activity by individual voters, if such crimes have not occurred in the State or political subdivision in substantial numbers. Mere invocation of interests in voter confidence or prevention of fraud. . Section 2 of such Act ( 52 U.S.C. 10301 ), as amended by subsections (a), (b), and
(c)is further amended by adding at the end the following: A violation of subsection
(a)is also established if a challenged qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure is intended, at least in part, to dilute the voting strength of a protected class or to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race, color, or in contravention of the guarantees set forth in section 4(f)(2). Discrimination on account of race or color, or in contravention of the guarantees set forth in section 4(f)(2), need only be one purpose of a qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure in order to establish a violation of subsection (a), as described in this subsection. A qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure intended to dilute the voting strength of a protected class or to make it more difficult for members of a protected class to cast a ballot that will be counted constitutes a violation of subsection (a), as described in this subsection, even if an additional purpose of the qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure is to benefit a particular political party or group. Recent context, including actions by official decisionmakers in prior years or in other contexts preceding the decision responsible for the challenged qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure, and including actions by predecessor government actors or individual members of a decisionmaking body, may be relevant to making a determination about a violation of subsection (a), as described under this subsection. A claim that a violation of subsection
(a)has occurred, as described under this subsection, shall require proof of a discriminatory impact but shall not require proof of violation of subsection
(b)or (c). .
Connectionstraces to 1
1 reference not yet in our index
- 478 U.S. 30
Citation graph
cites case law
Cites 2Cited by 0 across 0 sources