- Court: United States Supreme Court
- Area(s) of Law: Constitutional Law
- Date Filed: July 1, 2021
- Case #: 19-1257
- Judge(s)/Court Below: ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and THOMAS, GORSUCH, KAVANAUGH, and BARRETT, JJ., joined. GORSUCH, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which THOMAS, J., joined. KAGAN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which BREYER and SOTOMAYOR, JJ., joined.
- Full Text Opinion
Arizona adopted two voting regulations; the out-of-precinct policy, which did not count votes if voters did not vote at designated precincts on Election Day, and House Bill 2023, which made it a crime for someone, absent persons specified in the statute, to knowingly collect an early ballot. Respondents filed suit, arguing Arizona’s out-of-precinct policy and H.B. 2023 violated §2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which prohibits states from imposing any regulation that results in denial or abridgment of the right of any U.S. citizen to vote on account of race. Respondents argued both regulations had an adverse and disparate effect on Arizona’s racial minority citizens and H.B. 2023 was enacted with racially discriminatory intent. The District Court rejected Respondents' claims but the en banc court of the Ninth Circuit On appeal, the Court reversed holding the out-of-precinct policy and H.B. 2023 did not violate §2 of the Voting Rights Act and H.B. 2023 was not enacted with racially discriminatory intent. The Court reasoned that neither regulation imposed burdens on voters that exceed the usual burdens of voting and any racial disparity in those burdens is small as the State had a legitimate interest in preventing election fraud. REVERSED AND REMANDED.