Whether the California Voting Rights Act violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

QUESTION PRESENTED In Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986), this Court held that a municipality’s at-large voting system does not violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act merely because there is racially polarized voting. Dissatisfied with this interpretation of Section 2, California adopted the California Voting Rights Act (“CVRA”), which creates “a broader basis for relief from vote dilution than available under the federal Voting Rights Act.” Jauregui v. City of Palmdale, 172 Cal. Rptr. 3d 333, 350 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014). To that end, the CVRA requires municipalities to dismantle at-large voting systems whenever there is racially polarized voting in the community—i.e., when the race of voters tends to correlate with the selection of certain candidates. The CVRA, in other words, makes race not just the dominant factor but the only factor for determining whether municipalities may use atlarge systems. The question presented is: Whether the California Voting Rights Act violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.