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

Thomas disent summary missing

 * 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)