A New York appeals court on Thursday reversed a lower court’s decision that found the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act (NYVRA) violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution.

The Second Department of the New York State Supreme Court Appellate Division rejected the defendants’ argument that any application of the NYVRA would violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because the act has the express purpose of changing the race-neutral at-large electoral system to benefit a racial group. The court instead found that many of the NYVRA’s applications produce remedies that do not sort voters based on race, “such as ranked-choice voting, cumulative voting, limited voting, and the elimination of staggered terms.”

The Equal Protection Clause bars any state from denying “any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The court explained that as a consequence, any government distribution of burdens or benefits on the basis of racial classifications must pass heavy scrutiny before finding it to be constitutional. The court added that a statute is facially unconstitutional only when it would violate the Constitution for every application.

NYVRA’s vote dilution provisions prohibit political subdivisions from using an at-large method of election that produces racially polarized subdivisions or has the effect of “impairing the ability of members of a [race, color, or language-minority group] to elect candidates of their choice or influence the outcome of elections.” The NYVRA also prohibits political subdivisions from using district-based or alternative methods of election that produce the same effects if they would usually defeat candidates preferred by those minority groups.

In March 2024, the plaintiffs sued the Town of Newburgh and its Town Board as “aggrieved persons” under the NYVRA, alleging vote dilution of the Black and Hispanic populations in violation of the act. The plaintiffs stated that every person elected to the Town Board has been white despite Black and Hispanic individuals constituting around 25 percent and 15 percent of the town population, respectively. The plaintiffs sought an order mandating the Town Board replace its at-large elections with a district-based election or another alternative method of election.

Among other defenses, the defendants argued that the NYVRA’s vote dilution provisions were facially unconstitutional in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. The lower court sided with the defendants on that basis. The plaintiffs appealed, with New York Attorney General Letitia James intervening as an appellant.

James released a victorious press statement following the appellate court’s decision on Thursday:

Our democracy thrives when all voters, regardless of their background, can make their voices heard at the ballot box. I am pleased with today’s decision upholding the constitutionality of New York’s John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act so that all New York voters can fairly and equally participate in our elections. My office will always protect and defend the constitutionality of our laws and New Yorkers’ most sacred right to vote.