On June 29, I reported on this order in a Euclid, Ohio voting rights case in which the U.S. opposed a cumulative voting/limited voting remedy. The judge then promised a fuller opinion, and I have now posted it here. The opinion raises fascinating issues related to remedying VRA violations and the role of considering differential turnout in the process. I expect we’ll hear more on this, either in this case or others, such as the Port Chester case.