Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority in a 5-to-4 ruling, reaffirmed the [Voting Rights Act] law’s authority over racially biased maps and the arcane structure of legal precedents and court tests that underpin it. Bernard Grofman, an election-law scholar at the University of California, Irvine, called Thursday’s ruling “an incredibly strong opinion — far stronger than anyone, certainly I, would have anticipated coming out of this court.” [Distinguished] Professor Grofman, whose expert testimony was pivotal in defining the scope of the law in a 1985 Supreme Court case, Thornburg v. Gingles, said the majority opinion addressed “each of the main arguments of those who’d like to end the Voting Rights Act and replace it with race-blind districting — and those arguments are completely rejected.”

For the full story, please visit https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/08/us/voting-rights-act-supreme-court.html.