prove that the law didn t have a retroaggressive effect or didn t have intentional discrimination. in this case, d.o.j. in the private african-american and hispanic plaintiffs have the burden of proof, so it s a little harder in that sense, which is one of the reasons why they are spending more time developing the record, you know, when in 2012 the state of texas decided to push forward for a very fast trial, because without the trial, the law wouldn t have been in effect, in this case, the law is in effect, but in so d.o.j. and others are trying to weigh through all the various data issues and it s really complicated. in texas, we don t register checking rights or anything like that, so the data record is very, very complicated. section 2 does get struck in or is, in effect, narrowed, what s left of the voting rights act as we know it?