Arizona, like every other State, has adopted rules to promote the order and integrity of its elections. At issue here are two such provisions: an “out-of-precinct policy,” which does not count provisional ballots cast in person on Election Day outside of the voter’s designated precinct, and a “ballot-collection law,” known as H.B. 2023, which permits only certain persons (i.e., family and household members, caregivers, mail carriers, and elections officials) to handle another person’s completed early ballot. A majority of States require in-precinct voting, and about twenty States limit ballot collection.
While the 9th Circuit was explaining that liberal billionaires have a right to censor, the Department of Justice was explaining that government has no right to coerce an individual to engage, or not engage, in economic activity based on that person's religious belief. It's called religious "freedom." Perhaps that's the word that confuses progressive activists and their cadre of "victims" who deliberately target Christian wedding vendors just to make their wrong-headed, hypocritical point.
Does 9th Circuit not know what's in the Constitution, or just ignores it? Either way, now liberal billionaires at Google, Facebook, YouTube, etc. have been given a green light to censor anything (conservative) they find unhelpful. Like individual liberty, a secure border, conservative thought; that kind of thing. The 9th says these public forums are "private." Does the 9th Circuit squint when it sees daylight after spending so much time in the pockets of mega wealthy progressives?