Your Civil+ free trial is ending soon
Click Free Trial in the task bar for more info.
Your Civil+ free trial is active
The subscription will auto-renew on {{insert end date}}. To manage your subscription, visit the Customer Portal.

Working on it...

We're working on the mobile experience for this page right now.

Thank you for your patience!

- Civil Team

Back to Home
Court Case

Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee

Brnovich v. DNC is one of the Supreme Court’s most significant — and divisive — voting rights cases in recent years.


In Brnovich v. DNC, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) argued that Arizona’s current out-of-precinct policy and ban on third-party collectors, sometimes called ballot harvesting, was unconstitutional. The DNC claimed both policies violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act as they have underlying consequences that disadvantage voters of color. After the Ninth Circuit ruled against the state’s policies, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich appealed to the Supreme Court. In a 6-3 decision, the Court overturned the Ninth Circuit and ruled for Brnovich. In his opinion, Justice Samuel Alito stated that the two policies were not adopted for discriminatory purposes and only had minor impacts on voters of color. Justices Elena Kagan, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor dissented, arguing that the conservative majority’s interpretation of Section 2 of the VRA substantially undermines its intended purpose and weakens voting rights more broadly.