U.S. Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Arizona Voting Restrictions, Racial Discrimination Case

The conservatives dominated in The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling this Thursday, upholding voting restrictions in Arizona. The 6-3 ruling destroyed hopes of eliminating legal challenges to restrictive voting laws in several states, including Georgia.

The ruling on Mark Brnovich, Attorney General of Arizona v. Democratic National Committee, ruled in favor of two restrictions. The first will not count votes placed in the wrong precinct, while the second makes it illegal for anyone other than a family member, caretaker, or election worker to collect early mail-in ballots.

A District Court during the initial case denied claims that the rules harmed Arizona’s minority populations. The District Court also denied that the ballot-collection restriction was put in place with discriminatory intent. That ruling, which initially was reversed, has now been upheld by the Supreme Court.

Justice Alito, who delivered the majority opinion, said plaintiffs failed to provide statistics or concrete evidence proving that the laws directly impacted minority voters or that they were put into law with discriminatory intent. It was ruled that the restrictions put in place do not violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

President Biden said during his official statement regarding the decision, “I am deeply disappointed in today’s decision by the United States Supreme Court that undercuts the Voting Rights Act, and upholds what Justice Kagan called “a significant race-based disparity in voting opportunities.”

Justice Kagan, Justice Breyer, and Justice Sotomayor, who all voted against the restrictions, wrote: “What is tragic here is that the Court has (once again) rewritten, in order to weaken, a statute that stands as a monument to America’s greatness, and protects against its basest impulses. What is tragic is that the Court has damaged a statute designed to bring about “the end of discrimination in voting.”

During the final decision of the term, delivered shortly after and 6-3, the court ruled that charitable organizations do not have to disclose donor information to the California Attorney General, saying the requirement, currently in effect in the state, violates free speech. This decision brings up concerns about the use of dark money and a lack of transparency. The case was the Koch brothers’ political advocacy group Americans For Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta, Attorney General Of California.