[EL] question about new DOJ suit against Georgia

[Lorraine Minnite]

Does anyone have a copy of the complaint?

- Lori Minnite

On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 12:08 PM Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:

> I guess my question is what is the “purpose prong” of Section 2 and could
> it survive a textualist challenge in the current Supreme Court?
>
>
>
> (a) No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting or standard,
> practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or
> political subdivision in a manner *which results in* a denial or
> abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on
> account of race or color, or in contravention of the guarantees set forth
> in section 10303(f)(2) of this title, as provided in subsection (b).
>
>
>
> Cf section 5:
>
>
>
> a) Whenever a State or political subdivision with respect to which the
> prohibitions set forth in section 10303(a) of this title based upon
> determinations made under the first sentence of section 10303(b) of this
> title are in effect shall enact or seek to administer any voting
> qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or
> procedure with respect to voting different from that in force or effect on
> November 1, 1964, or whenever a State or political subdivision with respect
> to which the prohibitions set forth in section 10303(a) of this title based
> upon determinations made under the second sentence of section 10303(b) of
> this title are in effect shall enact or seek to administer any voting
> qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or
> procedure with respect to voting different from that in force or effect on
> November 1, 1968, or whenever a State or political subdivision with respect
> to which the prohibitions set forth in section 10303(a) of this title based
> upon determinations made under the third sentence of section 10303(b) of
> this title are in effect shall enact or seek to administer any voting
> qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or
> procedure with respect to voting different from that in force or effect on
> November 1, 1972, such State or subdivision may institute an action in the
> United States District Court for the District of Columbia for a declaratory
> judgment that such qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or
> procedure *neither has the purpose nor will have the effect* of denying
> or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color, or in
> contravention of the guarantees set forth in section 10303(f)(2) of this
> title, and unless and until the court enters such judgment no person shall
> be denied the right to vote for failure to comply with such qualification,
> prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure:
>
> ..
>
> Emphases added
>
>
>
> *From: *John Tanner <john.k.tanner at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Friday, June 25, 2021 at 8:59 AM
> *To: *Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu>
> *Cc: *Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
> *Subject: *Re: [EL] question about new DOJ suit against Georgia
>
>
>
> DoJ needs statutory authority.   I don’t see the Court erasing the purpose
> prong of Section 2, though.  Do you?
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> On Jun 25, 2021, at 11:26 AM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:
>
> There’s a press conference now where DOJ officials are discussing bringing
> a case against Georgia for its new voting law. The claim is that Georgia
> enacted its law with a discriminatory purpose in violation of Section 2 of
> the VRA.
>
> Given the uncertainty about what Section 2 is going to mean in the context
> of vote denial cases with the pending *Brnovich* decision (and section
> 2’s focus on discriminatory results or effects rather than purpose), it
> seems this kind of claim should be coupled with a 14th/15th amendment
> intentional discrimination claim.
>
>
>
> Does DOJ have authority to sue for such constitutional violations?  I
> recall Justin writing something about this on the list a while back, but
> he’s now working for the Biden Administration and so I can’t ask him.
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Rick Hasen
>
> Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
>
> UC Irvine School of Law
>
> 401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
>
> Irvine, CA 92697-8000
>
> 949.824.3072 - office
>
> rhasen at law.uci.edu
>
> http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
>
> http://electionlawblog.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20210625/b1599c1a/attachment.html>