I think the intention behind things makes a big difference. The tests you are talking about were deliberately introduced as a scheme to deny a racial minority t

I think the intention behind things makes a big difference. The tests you are talking about were deliberately introduced as a scheme to deny a racial minority the right to vote; my idea has a very different intention behind it. Of course, I totally see how it might lead to unintentional indirect discrimination (“disparate impact”)-but there is a difference between that, and what was essentially direct discrimination covered with a thin veneer of “plausible deniability”.