Louisiana v. Callais · ¶173

And so too for Section 2's “totality of circumstances” inquiry. § 10301(b). Should some litigant miraculously arrive at that stage of a vote-dilution suit, he will find it transformed. The “totality” test, today's majority insists, must focus on only one thing: “intentional present-day voting discrimination.” Ante, at 121. But that is neither what Congress said nor what Congress meant when it added the phrase “totality of circumstances”—obviously referring to multiple things—to Section 2. See Allen, 599 U. S., at 26 (A “single-minded” concentration on “only one circumstance[ ]” “cannot be squared with [Section 2's] demand”). Derived from White, that phrase demands the kind of “intensely local appraisal” the Court there used to evaluate a districting plan's “impact” on a minority group's access to the political process. 412 U. S., at 769–770. That appraisal of course included evidence…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.