and so that's a way in which, you know, in particular the burdens that the law imposes are qume la they've and greater -- cumulative and greater. you take away early voting, you take away the opportunity for african-american voters to use same-day registration during that period, the more you take away that early voting period where voters can show up to any precinct, the more likely they are to end up in the wrong precinct on election day. >> what is your best evidence connecting that burden to the historical discrimination? >> i mean, i think the test that this court set out properly is that, you know, you start with a discriminatory burden, and so we show that through the disparate use, and we also show that through the socioeconomic effects of discrimination that amplify the fact that it's going to be more difficult for voters to navigate the process in north carolina without those mechanisms. so, you know, i'd give an example of a voter like gwendolyn farrington. i think some of the individual voters bring to light the uncontested numerical, socioeconomic and disparate use testimony.