Doesn’t this opening of Part III-A in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc. make it seem like CT was chomping at the bit to strike down NVRA?

Arizona has not challenged the constitutionality of the NVRA itself in this case. Nor has it alleged that Congress lacks authority to direct the EAC to create the federal form. As a result, I need not address those issues

You usually don’t address the issue of a law’s constitutionality if the issue is not raised. Then why mention it?

As I noted the other day, to get Justice Thomas’s vote, always argue that the law is unconstitutional.

It is noteworthy that Scalia’s majority opinion repeatedly responds to points Justice Alito made, but basically ignores Justice Thomas, whose opinion is largely originalist!