The US supreme court questioned Arizona election laws on a case that violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
The state of Arizona and Republicans want to keep the restrictive voting law arguing the law prevents fraud. While the Democrats argue that the law restricts people from accessing the ballot.
The outcome of this case can have a far-reaching implication for the voting laws in other states.
Chief Justice John Roberts asked Justice Amy Coney Barret, who is defending the laws.
"What if the provision results in a 1 percent decline in participation by minority voters — is that substantial enough?" he asked.
"There's a difficulty that the statutory language and its lack of clarity present in trying to figure out when something crosses from an inconvenience to a burden," Barrett said.
Robert, Barret, and two other Trump-appointed justices are likely to be deciding votes in the case.
When asked by Barrett what the state Republican Party's interest in the case was, he replied: “Because it puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats. Politics is a zero-sum game. And every extra vote they get through unlawful interpretations of Section 2 hurts us. It's the difference between winning an election 50-49 and losing an election.”