I agree with Prof. Hasen on this.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/06/sonia-sotomayors-husted-dissent-points-the-way-forward-on-racist-voter-purge-laws.html
....but both opinions said little about the key political issue underlying the case, an issue Justice Sotomayor flagged in her separate dissent. After noting that Congress passed the Motor Voter law in light of a history of using restrictive registration and purge rules to suppress the vote, the Justice pointed to evidence showing that the process “has disproportionately affected minority, low-income, disabled, and veteran voters.” She noted evidence that in Hamilton County, Ohio, “African-American-majority neighborhoods in downtown Cincinnati had 10% of their voters removed due to inactivity” since 2012, as “compared to only 4% of voters in a suburban, majority-white neighborhood.” She also cited amicus briefs explaining “at length how low voter turnout rates, language-access problems, mail delivery issues, inflexible work schedules, and transportation issues, among other obstacles, make it more difficult for many minority, low-income, disabled, homeless, and veteran voters to cast a ballot or return a notice, rendering them particularly vulnerable to unwarranted removal under” Ohio’s process.
Justice Sotomayor pointed out that another provision of the Motor Voter law requires that any removal program “be uniform, nondiscriminatory, and in compliance with the Voting Rights Act,” and this part of the law provides a potential path forward. As more states enact laws like Ohio’s, it will become further apparent that these laws have discriminatory effects.
And aside from lawsuits, worries about voter suppression have energized the left to fight such laws politically. In at least some states, discriminatory laws like Ohio’s can be fought through legislative battles and at the ballot box.
In 2008, the SCOTUS rejected a facial challenge to the Indiana voter id law. In 2014 a federal district judge found that the Texas voter id law discriminated against minorities. Here is a chart that shows the effect of the Texas voter id law on Democratic turnout
Greg Abbott got more votes in 2014 compared to Rick Perry while Wendy Davis got far fewer votes even though she spent more.
In 2016 the 5th Circuit affirmed this ruling and the Texas voter id law was largely gutted so that any registered voter can vote if they lack one of the approved ids and sign a Reasonable Impediment Declaration and provide one of the alternative ids which includes utility bills or bank statements. For college students, out of state drivers license are an approved id
This lawsuit is not the end of the issue. There will be further litigation after there evidence is developed to show that this law has an adverse impact on minorities. The roadmap has been set by the Texas voter id litigation.