In the case of Briscoe v. Bell, 1976, the Supreme Court was asked to consider whether a Texas statute that allowed for at-large elections in certain counties violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs argued that this system diluted minority voting power and thus infringed upon their constitutional rights. However, the court held that there was no violation as long as all voters had an equal opportunity to participate in electoral processes and influence outcomes regardless of race or group membership. This decision reaffirmed previous rulings stating that laws affecting political processes do not automatically become unconstitutional simply because they impact different groups differently; rather, it must be shown that these differences are created intentionally to discriminate against particular groups.

In the dissenting opinion for Briscoe v. Bell, Justice Brennan disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold Texas' system of electing state judges through popular vote. He argued that this method was inherently discriminatory and violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it diluted minority voting power. He pointed out that in multi-member districts where a racial or political group is in minority, their votes are often overwhelmed by those of the majority group, effectively denying them equal representation on judicial benches. Furthermore, he contended that there was substantial evidence showing such discrimination had occurred in Texas due to its at-large election system for judgeships which disadvantaged African-American and Mexican-American voters who were unable to elect candidates of their choice despite being sizable populations within certain districts.