Mark Sherman for AP:

Richard Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California at Irvine law school, said the outcome is hard to predict. “Many of the things that the bill does are in line with what other states already do, so the question is whether a contraction of voting rights for bad purposes is illegal, even if the contraction does not go as far as some other states (or that Georgia considered),” Hasen wrote in an email.

Courts have made it harder to prove intentional racial discrimination, and “a partisan intent, even if it overlaps with race, may well not be enough,” Hasen said.

State and federal courts, including judges appointed by Trump, widely rejected lawsuits brought by the former president and his supporters challenging the election results.

But Republican-led states have fared better in federal court over other election issues, most notably a ruling last year that forced Florida felons to pay off fines and fees before regaining their right to vote.