Not sure this is a good decision, but it was basically a reaction to the District Court. As in Bush v Gore, things get dicey when SCOTUS is asked to review a state election law written by a court, rather than by a legislature. https://twitter.com/WSJMattD4/status/1247304424894185474

This is the core principle uniting tonight's decision with Bush v Gore

That said, there really is no good reason for Wisconsin to be holding a primary right now at all.

Judges are uniquely unsuited to write election laws. SCOTUS continues to struggle with how best to handle situations where the lower court decision has rewritten the law, but comes out again & again against judicial innovations that cut legislatures out of the job.

Right. The Court is inventing a law out of whole cloth to allow more votes to be counted. It got stuck in that position due to a long train of bad decisions by Gov. Evers, WI legislators, the lower courts, & the litigants. https://twitter.com/POLITICO_Steve/status/1247307174365323264

The unsigned opinion eviscerates Ginsburg's dissent for just totally ignoring the evidence & the procedural posture

The better decision in any sane situation would be to tell the legislature to live with the rules as written or fix them. Unfortunately, we have the Court getting the case the night before Election Day with a pandemic ongoing & nobody trying to resolve thru the political process.

This is, in any situation, not conducive to good judicial decisionmaking, particularly when the Justices can't even sit in the same room. Thus, a sloppy decision & an essentially lawless dissent.