The dissent in the SAVE database ruling

From this report:

 "In a dissenting opinion joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson called Friday’s decision a 'questionable interim ruling about two statutory provisions' that the Supreme Court 'has never before interpreted.' She also contended that the majority 'focuses only on the harms the Government will purportedly suffer absent a stay, disregarding the harms that the' use of the modified database 'has caused, and will likely continue to cause, to lawful voters.'"

Very good question given previous posts showing the possible harm to the government in non-citizen voting is minuscule compared to the loss of voting rights of legal citizens.