The Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up two legal challenges to a Texas law that criminalizes paying or receiving payment for helping voters with mail-in ballots, effectively letting a lower court's approval of the restrictions stand. The decision marks a significant setback for civil rights organizations that had argued the state measure conflicts with a key provision of the Voting Rights Act.
At the heart of the dispute is Section 208 of the VRA, which guarantees that voters who are blind, disabled, or unable to read or write can get assistance from a person of their choice—excluding employers, union officials, and certain others. The plaintiffs, including the nonprofit La Unión del Pueblo Entero (LUPE) and OCA-Greater Houston, contended that Texas's Senate Bill 1, enacted in 2021, effectively nullifies this protection by making it a felony to compensate anyone for such help.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's office defended the law, arguing that Section 208 only dictates who can assist, not whether they can be paid. In court filings, Paxton's team asserted that the state retains authority to regulate the financial aspects of election administration, and that Congress did not intend to strip states of that power. “That is not what Section 208 says or does,” they wrote.
A federal district judge in the Western District of Texas initially ruled that the state ban was preempted by the VRA and blocked enforcement. But the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that decision, siding with the state. Monday's Supreme Court action leaves that appellate ruling in place, with no further review.
For voting rights advocates, the outcome is a blow to efforts to protect access for voters of color, those with disabilities, and individuals with limited English proficiency—groups that often rely on trained, paid staff to navigate mail-in ballot procedures. LUPE said the law has forced it to turn away members seeking help completing ballots out of fear of prosecution.
The decision follows a broader pattern of the Supreme Court narrowing the Voting Rights Act's reach. Earlier this year, in a 6-3 ruling along ideological lines, the Court struck down Louisiana's second majority-Black congressional district as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander, weakening the VRA's protections against racial discrimination in redistricting.
Texas's ban on paid voter assistance is part of a wave of state-level voting restrictions passed after the 2020 election. Critics argue such measures disproportionately affect marginalized communities, while supporters maintain they are necessary to prevent fraud and preserve election integrity.
The high court's refusal to hear the case leaves the legal landscape unchanged for now, but the underlying dispute over the scope of Section 208 could resurface in future litigation. The Supreme Court's recent ruling affirming states' authority over mail ballot deadlines underscores the ongoing tension between federal voting rights and state election laws.
