Arizona Republican Party v. Democratic National Committee

Consolidated with:

Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee

Docket No.	Op. Below	Argument	Opinion	Vote	Author	Term
19-1258	9th Cir.	Mar 2, 2021	Jul 1, 2021	6-3	Alito	OT 2020

Holding: Arizona"s out-of-precinct policy and H.B. 2023 do not violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, and H.B. 2023 was not enacted with a racially discriminatory purpose.

Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Alito on July 1, 2021. Justice Gorsuch filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Thomas joined. Justice Kagan filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Breyer and Sotomayor joined.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

The Supreme Court gets it right on Section 2 (Hans von Spakovsky, July 7, 2021)
Selective originalism and selective textualism: How the Roberts court decimated the Voting Rights Act (David Gans, July 7, 2021)
Brnovich, election-law tradeoffs, and the limited role of the courts (Derek Muller, July 6, 2021)
One of the oldest problems in America persists: How to protect the voting rights of non-white citizens (Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, July 6, 2021)
Court upholds Arizona voting restrictions, limits cases under Voting Rights Act (Amy Howe, July 1, 2021)
Majority appears poised to uphold Arizona voting rules (Amy Howe, March 2, 2021)
A false choice between state sovereignty and multi-racial democracy (Loren AliKhan and Harrison Stark, February 24, 2021)
The Voting Rights Act isnt a moving target, but the 9th Circuits test would turn it into one (Megan Larrondo and Robert Barry, February 23, 2021)
A partisan battle in an overreach of a case (Richard Hasen, February 22, 2021)
Supreme Court needs to set clear standards for vote-denial claims (Ilya Shapiro and Stacy Hanson, February 19, 2021)
Voting discrimination is getting worse, not better (LaShawn Warren, February 18, 2021)
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act: Equal opportunity vs. disparate impact (Christopher Kieser, February 17, 2021)
Justices to consider whether Arizonas voting rules discriminate against minorities (Amy Howe, February 16, 2021)
February argument calendar includes immigration, voting-rights cases (Amy Howe, December 31, 2020)
Justices add seven new cases to docket, including major voting-rights dispute (Amy Howe, October 2, 2020)
Petitions of the week (Andrew Hamm, June 5, 2020)

Date	Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
04/27/2020	Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 1, 2020)
05/04/2020	Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Arizona Republican Party, et al.
05/20/2020	Motion of respondent Katie Hobbs, Arizona Secretary of State to extend the time to file a response from June 1, 2020 to July 1, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
05/20/2020	Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including July 1, 2020, for all respondents.
06/01/2020	Brief amici curiae of Elijah Haahr, et al. filed. VIDED
06/01/2020	Brief amici curiae of Governor Douglas A. Ducey, et al. filed. VIDED.
07/01/2020	Brief of respondent Katie Hobbs, Arizona Secretary of State in opposition filed. VIDED.
07/01/2020	Brief of respondents Democratic National Committee, et al. in opposition filed. VIDED.
07/29/2020	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
07/29/2020	Reply of petitioners Arizona Republican Party, et al. filed. (Distributed)
10/02/2020	Petition GRANTED. The petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 19-1257 is granted. The cases are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. VIDED.
10/02/2020	Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 19-1257. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 19-1257. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.”
12/31/2020	SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, March 2, 2021. VIDED.
01/22/2021	CIRCULATED
01/25/2021	Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.
01/28/2021	Record from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit electronic and located on Pacer.
02/24/2021	USDC, D. Ariz. plaintiffs' exhibits electronically received. VIDED.
02/24/2021	USDC, D. Ariz. defendants' exhibits electronically received. VIDED.
03/02/2021	Argued. For petitioners in 19-1258: Michael A. Carvin, Washington, D. C. For petitioners in 19-1257: Mark Brnovich, Attorney General, Phoenix, Ariz. For respondent Secretary Hobbs: Jessica R. Amunson, Washington, D. C. For respondents DNC, et al.: Bruce V. Spiva, Washington, D. C. VIDED.
07/01/2021	Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Gorsuch, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Thomas, J., joined. Kagan, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Breyer and Sotomayor, JJ., joined. VIDED.
08/02/2021	JUDGMENT ISSUED.