Plaintiffs contend that curing the decades-long racial gerrymandering led to “more drastic changes than is ordinary” following a redistricting cycle such that citizens will be confused about who represents them. See Reply at 7 (citing Navajo Nation v. San Juan Cnty., No. 2:12-cv-39, 2017 WL 6547635, at *18 (D. Utah Dec. 21, 2017)). In Plaintiffs' view, “[a]n order setting special elections is necessary to fully effectuate the use of [the Court's Interim Remedial Plan] by ensuring that as soon as practicable, voters live and vote in-and are represented by School Board members elected from- non-racially gerrymandered districts.” Id.

The same is true when courts remedy other districting violations and craft their remedial plans in view of § 2’s requirements. See, e.g. , Navajo Nation v. San Juan County , 2017 WL 6547635, at *13 (D. Utah Dec. 21, 2017) (imposing remedial plan creating districts with Native American voting-age populations of 63% and 64%, among others), aff’d , 929 F.3d 1270 (10th Cir. 2019) ; Adamson v. Clayton County Elections & Registration Bd. , 876 F. Supp. 2d 1347, 1357–58 & n.7 (N.D. Ga. 2012) (drawing districts in remedial plan with BVAP’s from 59% to 77%).Shelby County v. Holder , 570 U.S. 529, 548, 133 S.Ct. 2612, 186 L.Ed.2d 651 (2013) ; see also Charles S. Bullock III & Ronald Keith Gaddie, The Triumph of Voting Rights in the South 323 (2009) ("The consensus is that the [VRA] has been inordinately successful."); Samuel Issacharoff et al., The Law of Democracy: Legal Structure of the Political Process 514–16 (4th ed. 2012) (stating that "guarantees of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were essentially disregarded in many states" before the VRA, which "transformed American politics in a variety of ways").