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




Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Jul 2, 2026
- Method
- Methodology
Primary materials10
Supreme Court docket 19-1257
docket | Jul 25, 2026
Primary case document
Supreme Court document | Jul 25, 2026
CourtListener docket record
docket | Jul 25, 2026
Questions Presented
brief | May 24, 2026
opinion
opinion | Jul 1, 2021
Petition
brief | Apr 27, 2020
SupremeCourt.gov
official | Jul 2, 2026
SupremeCourt.gov
official | Jul 2, 2026
SupremeCourt.gov
official | Jul 2, 2026
SupremeCourt.gov
official | Jul 2, 2026