SCOTUS issues shadow docket rulings in Arizona election disputes

https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/96-bad-supreme-court-math?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1174827&post_id=148104588&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=cw8n&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

SCOTUS reversed a lower court and put back a confusing ruling that is at odds with their self-proclaimed "Purcell principle" that rulings too close to an election should be avoided in order not to confuse voters. See a quote below from UofTexas law professor Steve Vladeck.

"Third, and most importantly, there's the difference-splitting votes of one/both of the Chief Justice and Justice Kavanaugh—and the difficulty of reconciling those votes with the Court's purported adherence to the controversial "Purcell principle." Professor Rick Hasen wrote about this over at his Election Law Blog on Friday, but to make a long story short, the best defense of Purcell is the need to avoid court rulings that increase voter confusion heading into an election cycle. How can that "principle" be reconciled with a ruling that puts back into effect Arizona's requirement that those registering to vote on the state paper form provide documentary proof of citizenship, when those who register online or use the federal form don't have to? Or the need for different ballots depending upon whether the voter registered with a state paper form, a state electronic form, or a federal form? Or the possibility that those who used the state paper form while the proof-of-citizenship requirement was blocked might now have their registrations rejected?"