I think this is the first cite to NFIB by the Supreme Court since, well, NFIB.

Nevertheless, the Court suggests that limiting the jurisdictional scope of the VRA in an appropriate case would be “to try our hand at updating the statute.” Ante, at 22. Just last Term, however, the Court rejected this very argument when addressing a materially identical severability provision, explaining that such a provision is “Congress’ explicit textual instruction to leave unaffected the remainder of [the Act]” if any particular “application is unconstitutional.” National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U. S. __, __ (2012) (plurality opinion) (slip op., at 56) (internal quotation marks omit­ ted); id., at __ (GINSBURG, J., concurring in part, concur­ ring in judgment in part, and dissenting in part) (slip op., at 60) (agreeing with the plurality’s severability analysis).