Good day all. Last week, the Supreme Court threw a large wrench into the Progressive’s plans to rig elections with a ruling on a couple of laws recently passed in Arizona. The ruling was along the classic Constitutionalist vs Progressive split, going 6 to 3 in favor of Arizona.
The laws in question are designed to prevent the tools used by the Democratic CommuNazi Party to basically commit election fraud. The Progressives, once the laws were passed and signed into law, were promptly challenged byt the Liberal using their favored claims, that it’s racist and will stop minorities from voting. Here are the details from CNBC:
The Supreme Court on Thursday, (July 1st), ruled 6-3 along partisan lines to uphold Arizona voting rules supported by Republicans that Democrats alleged unlawfully discriminated against the state’s Native American, Hispanic and Black voters.
The case concerned two Arizona voting rules that a federal appeals court found to be in violation of the Voting Rights Act, citing their disproportionate impact on minorities. In an opinion for the court’s majority, Justice Samuel Alito said that neither rule violated the civil rights law.
The appeals court was the 9th Circus, and as expected, they sided with the Progressive Liberal Democratic CommuNazis. Even with the good work of President Trump, the Moonbat class of judges still rules the roost, which is why they are consistently slapped down by the Supreme Court. (In a few cases unanimously) Now the two laws that were challenged blocked two things near and dear to what passes for the Progressive heart. Ballot harvesting and voting outside of your precinct.
One of the measures, known as the “out-of-precinct policy,” disqualifies ballots cast in the wrong precinct on Election Day. The other measure, known as the “ballot collection law,” forbids most people except for family members to collect and deliver ballots to the polls. Republicans often refer to third-party ballot collection as ballot harvesting.
Ballot harvesting is probably the bigger of the two. It allowed the Democrats to send in activists to places like nursing homes and “Pick up the residents ballots in “Sealed” envelopes.” In many cases, the number of ballots far exceeded the number of residents, and frankly, a fair number of the residents were not mentally capable of casting a vote. Not surprising anyone, all of these ballots tended to go straight Democrats with not a single vote for the Republican candidates.
The Democratic National Committee challenged the two measures under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires elections to be equally open to people of all races. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the DNC.
The full appeals court said in a ruling last year that the out-of-precinct policy had a discriminatory impact on Native American, Hispanic and Black voters in Arizona. With regard to the ballot collection law, the court said that the circumstances “cumulatively and unmistakably revealed” that racial bias was responsible for its enactment.
The excuse used by the 9th Circus was that about 1% of the ballots cast by Indians Native Americans, Blacks and Hispanics were cast in the wrong precinct. About .5% of Whites made the same mistake. As far as the moonbats on the 9th Circus were concerned, it’s “RACISM!!” However, Justice Alito, who wrote the decision, disagreed.
“A policy that appears to work for 98% or more of voters to whom it applies — minority and non-minority alike — is unlikely to render a system unequally open,” Alito wrote.
How people voted in the wrong precinct can probably be laid to ignorance on where their actual polling place is, and that when they arrived at what they thought was their precinct, they did same day registration. (I’m also opposed to same day registration. You literally have years to go in and register. If you can’t be bothered, then tough. You’re to lazy or stupid to vote)
On the ballot collection measure, Alito said that Democrats failed to show that the law had a disparate impact at all. Even if the law did have such an impact, he wrote, that would not be enough to make the law invalid under the Voting Rights Act, given the state’s interest in setting its election rules.
That last bit, “given the state’s interest in setting its election rules” is going to be a shot across the bow of the CommuNazis pushing H.R. 1 and S. 1. It reaffirms that the election process is a state matter, not a federal one unless there is clear proof that the state is actively preventing people from voting due to skin color, religion, etc. This and other similar laws do not do this.
In a dissent joined by Breyer and Sotomayor, Kagan called the majority decision a tragedy.
“What is tragic here is that the Court has (yet again) rewritten — in order to weaken — a statute that stands as a monument to America’s greatness, and protects against its basest impulses,” Kagan wrote. “What is tragic is that the Court has damaged a statute designed to bring about ‘the end of discrimination in voting.’”
Those three have consistently proven that they are unfit to be on the bench, should never have been confirmed and frankly, should be removed. It’s long past time that judges and justices face impeachment for repeated and willful violations of the Constitution. Meanwhile, the Republicans are celebrating the victory of the Rule of Law and the Constitution.
Ronna McDaniel, the Republican National Committee chairwoman, said in a statement that the decision was a “resounding victory for election integrity and the rule of law.”
“Democrats were attempting to make Arizona ballots less secure for political gain, and the Court saw right through their partisan lies. In Arizona and across the nation, states know best how to manage their own elections,” McDaniel said.
The decision marks the first time that the court has considered how Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act applies to state laws that govern ballot collection and counting. In the 2013 case Shelby County v. Holder, the top court weakened a separate provision of the law, which had mandated that localities with histories of discrimination receive federal clearance for new voting measures.
The problem with the Voting Rights Act is that a fair part of it is questionable under the Constitution. This is why the courts have been ruling against sections of it. This isn’t to say that entire law is unconstitutional. However, it may also be time to fully review it. It was passed almost 60 years ago and frankly, everything has changed. Of course, the Maladministration of the Fake President is rather unhappy with the ruling.
President Joe Biden’s Department of Justice has pledged to increase its focus on voting rights as a result of the Shelby County decision, as well as the new election bills. Last month, Attorney General Merrick Garland said he was doubling his staff dedicated to voting rights enforcement.
Look for Garland’s Goons to go all in on suppressing the Conservatives and the Deplorables.
Biden said in a statement that he was “deeply disappointed in today’s decision by the United States Supreme Court that undercuts the Voting Rights Act, and upholds what Justice Kagan called ‘a significant race-based disparity in voting opportunities.’”
“In a span of just eight years, the Court has now done severe damage to two of the most important provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 – a law that took years of struggle and strife to secure,” Biden said.
A law that may no longer be applicable. The VRA was passed with good intentions, and also with some need. The southern states of the old Confederacy were actively suppressing black voters. The thing is, those people who were doing this are long since dead, and the natural migration of Americans from one region to another has changed things. What Biden’s handlers are angry about is that they can no longer use the VRA as a tool to rig elections. Of course, the Progressives are saying this hurts voting rights and that they should be allowed to continue stuffing the ballot box.
In a statement issued after the court’s decision was released, American Civil Liberties Union voting rights attorney Davin Rosborough said” the court’s narrowing of Section 2 is especially disturbing given its importance in combating voter suppression laws that disproportionately harm communities of color.”
I always find it interesting how the Progressive Liberal Elite always refers to people who aren’t Caucasian as “People of Color.” I thought that crap went out in the 60’s.
“The court’s decision adopts a standard for proving violations of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act that is unduly cramped and at odds with the law’s intent of eradicating all voting practices that are racially discriminatory in their effects on voting opportunity, whether blunt or subtle,” he said.
Actually, what you want to do is eradicate any ability for Constitutionalists, Republicans and MAGA supporting deplorables of having any chance of winning an election. You have been using the VRA as a tool to suppress anyone who won’t vote the way you want them to, and also to make sure that you could rig elections.
It isn’t generally known, but up until 2018, the Republican Party was unable to actually investigate any potential election fraud cases. This was due to a stupid consent decree that some meathead signed off on in the 80’s. Even if the Republicans had first hand knowledge of fraud, they were forbidden by a judge from acting on it.
2020 was the first election where the Republicans could look into election and voter fraud, and as we have been seeing, there appears to have been some major problems. Arizona has been auditing the whole election process held in Maricopa County, and in Georgia, the election in Fulton County was recently called “Massively incompetent.” We also saw how many states changed the election rules in violation of their own laws. The Courts, rather then forcing states to actually follow their own laws, refused to hear cases.
Now one has been heard and the Progressive Liberal Democratic CommuNazis are most unhappy. They are back to looking at packing the supreme court and the lower courts with people who will flat out tear up the Constitution and aid them in their goal of a centrally controlled, singe party totalitarian state. If they proceed to do this, we can kiss the Republic goodbye. Frankly, I would not like to see Kurt Schlichter’s Kelly Trumbull novels become fact.
Thatisall
(3 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
~The Angry Webmaster~
