Interesting. I never heard of that.
In an nutshell the decree forbids voter caging based on race or ethnicity.
With regard to the instant situation it appears that a lawyer could defend the voter caging actions in the context of the decree on the grounds that caging actions, if any were taken at all, were based on voters' party aspirations and not their race or ethnicity. It's a cheap but plausible argument. Of course the DNC lawyers would argue that even if what the RNC says is true, the effects of their actions would be to disenfranchise voters based on race or ethnicity.
What an embarrassing clusterscrew for self government.
What shocked me was that the RNC, in ther motion for rehearing en banc, characterized the decree as "antiquated". Really, one man, one vote, is an antiquated concept?
If I was the judge it would be all I could do to refrain from telling the RNC's lawyers to pack their shit and get the fuck out of my court room.
At the end of the day I think it will be attorney generals in the affected states that carry the biggest sticks, not the decree.
Thanks for the lesson.