; and (2) by striking as provided in subsection (b) and inserting as provided in subsection (b), (c), (d), or (e) . (b) Vote dilution Section 2 of such Act ( 52 U.S.C. 10301 ), as amended by subsection (a), is further amended by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following: (b) A violation of subsection (a) for vote dilution is established if, based on the totality of circumstances, it is shown that the political processes leading to nomination or election in the State or political subdivision are not equally open to participation by members of a class of citizens protected by subsection (a) in that its members have less opportunity than other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice. The extent to which members of a protected class have been elected to office in the State or political subdivision is one circumstance which may be considered: Provided, That nothing in this section establishes a right to have members of a protected class elected in numbers equal to their proportion in the population. The legal standard articulated in Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986), governs claims under this subsection. For purposes of this subsection a class of citizens protected by subsection (a) may include a cohesive coalition of members of different racial or language minority groups. . (c) Vote denial or abridgement Section 2 of such Act ( 52 U.S.C. 10301 ), as amended by subsections (a) and (b), is further amended by adding at the end the following: (c) (1) A violation of subsection (a) for vote denial or abridgment is established if the challenged standard, practice, or procedure imposes a discriminatory burden on members of a class of citizens protected by subsection (a), meaning that— (A) members of the protected class face greater difficulty in complying with the standard, practice, or procedure, considering the totality of the circumstances