Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21a720_6536.pdf
Page Number: 6.0

6 

NETCHOICE, LLC v. PAXTON 

ALITO, J., dissenting 

proceedings.  While I can understand the Court’s apparent 
desire  to  delay  enforcement  of  HB20  while  the  appeal  is 
pending, the preliminary injunction entered by the District
Court was itself a significant intrusion on state sovereignty, 
and Texas should not be required to seek preclearance from 
the federal courts before its laws go into effect.  The Court 
of Appeals, after briefing and oral argument, concluded that 
the District Court’s order should be stayed, and a decision
on the merits can be expected in the near future.  I would 
not disturb the Court of Appeals’ informed judgment about 
applicants’ entitlement to a stay. 

For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.