Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/16-980_f2q3.pdf
Page Number: 25

Cite as:  584 U. S. ____ (2018) 

1 

THOMAS, J., concurring 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 16–980 
_________________ 

JON HUSTED, OHIO SECRETARY OF STATE, 
PETITIONER v. A. PHILIP RANDOLPH 
INSTITUTE, ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT 

[June 11, 2018] 

  THOMAS, J., concurring. 
  I  join  the  Court’s  opinion  in  full.    I  write  separately  to 
add  that  respondents’  proposed  interpretation  of  the  Na-
tional  Voter  Registration  Act  (NVRA)  should  also  be  re-
jected  because  it  would  raise  significant  constitutional 
concerns. 
  Respondents  would  interpret  the  NVRA  to  prevent 
States  from  using  failure  to  vote  as  evidence  when  decid-
ing whether their voting qualifications have been satisfied.  
Brief for Respondents 25–30.  The Court’s opinion explains 
why  that  reading  is  inconsistent  with  the  text  of  the 
NVRA.    See  ante,  at  7–18.    But  even  if  the  NVRA  were 
“susceptible”  to  respondents’  reading,  it  could  not  prevail 
because  it  “raises  serious  constitutional  doubts”  that  the 
Court’s interpretation avoids.  Jennings v. Rodriguez, 583 
U. S. ___, ___ (2018) (slip op., at 2). 
  As  I  have  previously  explained,  constitutional  text  and 
history  both  “confirm  that  States  have  the  exclusive  au-
thority to set voter qualifications and to determine whether 
those  qualifications  are  satisfied.”    Arizona  v.  Inter 
Tribal  Council  of  Ariz.,  Inc.,  570  U. S.  1,  29  (2013) 
(THOMAS, J., dissenting).  The Voter-Qualifications Clause 
provides  that,  in  elections  for  the  House  of  Representa-
tives, “the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifica-