The Supreme Court dealt another blow to the Voting Rights Act on Thursday, ruling in favor of Republicans that Arizona can maintain restrictions that critics say discriminate against nonwhite voters.

The ruling was a 6-3 vote and written by Justice Samuel Alito. Alitos opinion was joined by the five other conservative justices. Justice Elena Kagan penned a dissent and was joined by the other two liberal justices.

The ruling will have sweeping implications, opening the door for similar restrictions in other states by saying they are acceptable under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. However, the ruling stopped short of fully gutting Section 2.

Moments later and again in a 6-3 split between conservative and liberal justices the court issued a ruling in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta, saying California must stop collecting the names and addresses of top donors to charities. That ruling, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, could pose a problem for campaign finance disclosure laws in the future.

The decision in Brnovich v. DNC came just over eight years after Roberts authored a ruling that gutted another key provision of the pivotal 1965 law, passed in the wake of violence against Black Americans protesting to guarantee their right to vote.

The Supreme Courts 2013 decision paved the way for states, recently motivated by former President Donald Trumps repeatedly disproven lies about the 2020 election , to enact voting restrictions that could curtail access to the polls. Republican-controlled legislatures had passed more than 20 voting restriction bills in 14 states as of May, according to the Brennan Center for Justice , with another 60 bills in the works. The Brnovich v. DNC decision now stands to open the floodgates.