Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-1257_g204.pdf
Page Number: 7

Cite as:  594 U. S. ____ (2021) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the 
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to 
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that 
corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

Nos. 19–1257 and 19–1258 
_________________ 

MARK BRNOVICH, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF 
ARIZONA, ET AL., PETITIONERS 
v. 
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, ET AL. 

19–1257 

ARIZONA REPUBLICAN PARTY, ET AL., 
PETITIONERS 
v. 
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, ET AL. 

19–1258 

ON WRITS OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 

[July 1, 2021] 

  JUSTICE ALITO delivered the opinion of the Court. 
  In these cases, we are called upon for the first time to ap-
ply §2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to regulations that 
govern how ballots are collected and counted.  Arizona law 
generally makes it very easy to vote.  All voters may vote by 
mail or in person for nearly a month before election day, but 
Arizona imposes two restrictions that are claimed to be un-
lawful.  First, in some counties, voters who choose to cast a 
ballot in person on election day must vote in their own pre-
cincts or else their ballots will not be counted.  Second, mail-
in ballots cannot be collected by anyone other than an elec-
tion  official,  a  mail  carrier,  or  a  voter’s  family  member, 
household  member,  or  caregiver.    After  a  trial,  a  District 
Court  upheld  these  rules,  as  did  a  panel  of  the  United