Skip to main content

No. 19-1257October Term 2019Decided Jul 23, 2021

Docket 19-1257October Term 2019 (2019–2020)

Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee

Before oral argument, the main question is how far federal law limits state election rules that can make voting harder for some groups than others.

Case status

Current stage
Decided
Latest event
Decision released Jul 23, 2021
Case Accepted
Arguments
Decision ReleasedJul 23, 2021
What it's about

This case was about whether two Arizona voting rules unlawfully burden minority voters: a rule refusing to count ballots cast in the wrong precinct on Election Day, and a law limiting who may collect and return another person’s early mail ballot. The Supreme Court upheld both rules.

Question presented

1. Does Arizona's out-of-precinct policy violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act? 2. Does Arizona's ballot-collection law violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act or the Fifteenth Amendment?

Case path

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit / Decision released Jul 23, 2021

Area

Elections, Civil Rights

Briefing

What it's about

This case asks whether two Arizona voting rules unfairly burden minority voters: rejecting ballots cast in the wrong precinct on Election Day, and limiting who may collect and return another person's early mail ballot. At this stage, oral argument had not yet been scheduled.

Vote

No argument is scheduled yet. The dispute is whether Arizona's out-of-precinct rule and ballot-collection limits unlawfully burden minority voters under federal voting-rights law and the Constitution.

Impact

The case could shape how hard it is to challenge state election rules that fall more heavily on minority voters. It matters, for example, to a voter who shows up at the wrong polling place or needs help getting a mail ballot returned.

What's next

Watch for the Court to schedule oral argument or make another calendar move. No decision window is available yet.

What are the two Arizona voting rules at the center of Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee?

One rule rejects ballots cast in the wrong precinct on Election Day. The other limits who may collect and return another person's early mail ballot.

Who could feel the biggest effects of this case?

Voters who go to the wrong polling place or need help returning a mail ballot could be most affected. State election officials also have a stake.

What should court watchers look for next in this case?

The next major step is oral argument scheduling or another calendar move from the Court. A decision timeline is not available yet.

Decision

Decision record

What the Court decided

Before oral argument, the main question is how far federal law limits state election rules that can make voting harder for some groups than others.

Result
Affirmed

Impact

The case could shape how hard it is to challenge state election rules that fall more heavily on minority voters. It matters, for example, to a voter who shows up at the wrong polling place or needs help getting a mail ballot returned.

Not official Court text.

Opinion documents

Timing

Decided July 23, 2021

The Court released its decision on July 23, 2021 without hearing oral argument.