Talk:Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder

Latest comment: 15 years ago by Joncnunn in topic Thomas disent summary missing

Thomas disent summary missing

edit
It looks like the editor(s) who summarized the majority decision abruptly stopped there since there hasn't been any summary of the disent yet. Looks to me like Section 1 of the disent is (according to Thomas) why constitutional avoidance can not be avoided, and Section 2 of the disent is why (also according to Thomas) section 5 of the VRA is unconsitutional. Jon (talk) 17:59, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply