After Brnovich, Higher Barriers: How the Supreme Court’s Limits on the Voting Rights Act Hit Voters
This article contains affiliate links. We may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you.
The first election after *Brnovich* didn’t unravel at the ballot box—it unraveled in the miles driven, IDs rejected, and community voting traditions quietly dismantled. This article shows how the Supreme Court’s 2021 decision rewired the Voting Rights Act from a shield against racial exclusion into a legal obstacle course, allowing states to impose new barriers that rarely look discriminatory on paper but hit voters of color first and hardest. Read on to see how constitutional doctrine translated into everyday disenfranchisement—and why most of it now escapes the reach of federal law.
The first election after Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee looked ordinary on the surface—polls opened, ballots were cast, winners declared. The disruption came earlier, quieter, and largely out of view. A Navajo voter in Arizona drove an extra 90 miles because ballot collection vanished. A church-based “Souls to the Polls” drive in Georgia shrank after new limits on drop boxes. A college student in Texas learned, too late, that her campus ID no longer counted. These weren’t headline-grabbing fraud claims. They were the daily friction of voting after the Supreme Court raised the bar for proving discrimination.
What Brnovich Changed—and Why It Matters
In July 2021, the Court’s 6–3 decision in Brnovich narrowed Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), the statute that bars voting practices resulting in racial discrimination. Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito introduced a set of “guideposts” that tilted future challenges toward states: the size of the burden, historical practice, alternative voting methods, and the state’s interests in preventing fraud—even without evidence of widespread fraud.
Before Brnovich, plaintiffs could prevail by showing discriminatory effects. After it, they must clear a higher evidentiary hurdle, often needing to show both substantial burdens and stark racial disparities measured against 1982 baselines. The practical effect: fewer successful challenges to laws that make voting harder, particularly for communities of color.
The data moved fast. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, states enacted at least 21 laws with restrictive voting provisions in 2021 alone. By the 2022 midterms, 19 states had tightened rules around mail voting, drop boxes, or voter ID. Brnovich didn’t cause every change—but it changed the litigation risk calculus, emboldening legislatures and chilling lawsuits.
Arizona: Ground Zero, Long Tail
Arizona was the case itself, and the consequences linger. The Court upheld the state’s ban on most third‑party ballot collection and its out‑of‑precinct policy that discards ballots cast at the wrong location.
For voters on the Navajo Nation—where mail service is inconsistent and polling places are sparse—the ballot collection ban landed hard. A 2019 MIT Election Lab study found Native voters in Arizona were nearly twice as likely as white voters to rely on ballot assistance. After Brnovich, counties cut back on community-based collection efforts to avoid liability. Turnout on the Navajo Nation rebounded in 2022 due to intense organizing, but organizers reported higher costs and longer travel times per voter.
- 2021: Brnovich decided.
- 2022: Counties revise guidance; community groups scale back ballot assistance.
- 2024: Arizona voters pass Proposition 309, tightening voter ID for mail ballots—further friction layered atop Brnovich’s framework.
Voter takeaway: If you rely on mail voting in rural Arizona, a subscription to BallotTrax Voter Tracking Service offers real-time alerts on when your ballot is mailed, received, and counted—crucial when assistance options narrow.
Georgia: SB 202 Meets a Friendlier Court
Georgia’s SB 202, signed in March 2021, shortened runoff periods, limited drop boxes, and criminalized giving food or water to voters in line. Civil rights groups sued under Section 2. Post-Brnovich, courts upheld much of the law.
Drop box access tells the story. In 2020, metropolitan Atlanta counties deployed more than 100 drop boxes. By the 2022 midterms, the number fell to 23 statewide, and boxes were confined to early voting sites and business hours. Fulton County voters waited longer; lines exceeded two hours in some precincts during early voting.
Black turnout remained high due to mobilization, but the burden shifted from the state to voters and volunteers. That’s the Brnovich effect in practice: outcomes preserved, costs externalized.
Voter takeaway: Georgia voters who vote early can use TurboVote Election Reminder & Planning Kit—a paid premium version includes SMS reminders and location alerts that adjust when counties move or restrict early voting sites.
Texas: ID Rules Harden, Campuses Feel It
Texas SB 1 tightened voter ID rules and limited drive-through voting pioneered in Harris County. Lawsuits under Section 2 stalled after Brnovich, and the Fifth Circuit signaled skepticism toward effects-based claims.
The ID changes hit students. Student IDs from public universities no longer qualify, while handgun licenses do. During the 2022 election, Texas Civil Rights Project documented thousands of provisional ballots cast for ID issues, many later rejected.
- 2021: SB 1 enacted.
- 2022: Provisional ballots spike in urban counties; rejection rates climb.
- 2023–2024: Universities expand voter education, but the law stands.
Voter takeaway: A Compact Fireproof Document Organizer with RFID Lock helps voters keep acceptable IDs—passport, election certificate—secure and ready. It sounds mundane. It saves votes.
Wisconsin: When Courts Step Back, Clerks Step In
Wisconsin’s restrictions predate Brnovich, but the decision fortified defenses. The state banned most absentee ballot drop boxes in 2022 after a state supreme court ruling, and federal challenges faced steeper odds.
Municipal clerks responded with expanded in-person absentee hours. The adaptation worked unevenly. Milwaukee added hours; smaller towns didn’t. Turnout disparities widened between urban and rural precincts during early voting.
This pattern repeats nationally: local administrators shoulder the fix, and capacity determines whether voters feel the squeeze.
Voter takeaway: Vote.org’s Premium Absentee Assistant offers county-specific guidance and printable checklists that update when clerks change hours or locations.
Florida and the South: Fines, Fear, and Friction
Florida’s 2021 law limited drop boxes and created a new election police unit. A 2022 Section 2 challenge knocked out some provisions, but Brnovich narrowed others. By 2023, Florida imposed steep fines—up to $250,000—on groups for technical voter registration violations. Several organizations suspended drives altogether.
The chilling effect is measurable. According to the Florida Supervisors of Elections, third-party registrations dropped by more than 40% in the year after fines took effect. The law didn’t stop eligible voters from registering. It stopped helpers from helping.
National Democracy: Death by a Thousand Paper Cuts
Zoom out and the picture sharpens. The United States avoided the worst-case scenario—wholesale disenfranchisement—but accepted a slower bleed. The Election Assistance Commission reported that overall turnout in 2022 fell to 46.8% of eligible voters, down from 50.3% in 2018. Midterms vary, but the decline was steepest in states that tightened access.
Legal scholars call this “administrative burden shift.” When courts retreat, legislatures regulate aggressively, and voters pay in time, travel, and error rates. Brnovich didn’t erase the VRA; it made it harder to use precisely where it once worked best.
Landmark Implications—and a Critical Counterpoint
One year after Brnovich, the Court surprised observers in Allen v. Milligan (2023), upholding Section 2 in a redistricting case and rejecting Alabama’s attempt to weaken the results test. The message was narrow but important: Section 2 still has teeth in vote dilution cases.
The split matters. Courts now protect fair maps more readily than fair access. For voters, that means representation gains can coexist with harder paths to the ballot. Democracy expands and contracts at once.
What Voters Can Do Now
The higher legal bar shifts power back to individuals and local networks. Practical steps matter more than ever:
- Track everything: Use USPS Informed Delivery Mail Tracking alongside ballot trackers to catch delays early.
- Verify ID rules annually: States change acceptable IDs more often than election dates.
- Vote early, in person when possible: Restrictions hit mail and assistance first.
- Support local clerks: Budget hearings decide early voting hours as much as legislatures do.
- Document problems: Photos, timestamps, and names still fuel successful challenges—even under Brnovich.
The Voting Rights Act survived a body blow. Whether it thrives depends on vigilance at ground level, where the law now leaves more unsaid. The Supreme Court raised the barriers. Voters are learning, state by state, how high they’ve become—and how to climb them anyway.