“Writing for the court, Justice Samuel Alito said both laws pass muster under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
Ballot collection can lead to pressure and intimidation, he wrote.
And he suggested it doesn’t matter that no case of voting fraud has been linked to the practice.
“A State may take action to prevent election fraud without waiting for it to occur within its own borders,” he wrote.
Similarly, while the policy of disqualifying a ballot cast in the wrong precinct disproportionately affects voters of color, Alito said the disparity is “small in absolute terms.”
“Of the Arizona counties that reported out-of-precinct ballots in the 2016 general election, a little over 1% of Hispanic voters, 1% of African-American voters, and 1% of Native American voters who voted on election day cast an out-of-precinct ballot. For non-minority voters, the rate was around 0.5%,” he wrote. “A procedure that appears to work for 98% or more of voters to whom it applies — minority and non-minority alike — is unlikely to render a system unequally open.”
Five of the court’s nine other justices concurred or wrote their own concurrences — John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.
The court’s three more liberal members dissented — Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer.”
Comment: This appears to be a profound defeat for the Left and is likely to lead to further restrictions on such practices as “ballot harvesting.” pl