How so, what was the argument.
They had to vote by horse not a car?
The judge ruled that people are free to vote from their own Accord.
My guess is that somehow the voting wasn’t private, meaning people would be able to see who they voted for.
Basically, the argument is that drive-through voting does not comply with the methods prescribed by the Texas Legislature in the Texas Elections Code, and thus violates the Elections and Electors Clauses of Articles I and II. They also argue that it violates the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause because it was not adopted in any other Texas counties.
The plaintiffs made the same argument in the Texas Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court denied their petition.
The federal judge dismissed the case for lack of standing and because it was untimely. He also did not seem to agree on the merits, at least with regard to early voting. However, he commented that, had the plaintiffs had standing, he might grant an order preventing drive-through voting on election day, because the statute governing election day is different.
Vote collectors were bringing in votes from old folks homes and dropping them off to friendlies at the drive through rather than coming inside and getting seen by poll watchers with piles of votes... this is how sheila jackson lee wins every time... she doesn’t even campaign any more.