Good day all. One of the hot button issues around the country is securing the ballots and making sure that everyone who has the right to vote, can vote in the upcoming election. On the flip side, part of this is making sure that people who don’t have the right to vote, such as foreign nationals, don’t vote in our elections.
Thanks to the Tainted Election of 2020, states have been, in most cases, working to make sure that when someone votes, his or her vote isn’t diluted by fraud and that it actually counts. One of the ways states are doing this is with Voter ID laws and proof of citizenship.
This has set off the usual suspects on the left. (Pretty much all of them in fact) They are utterly opposed to anything that might prevent then from stealing another election. They have been filing lawsuits. Protesting and generally making a complete nuisance of themselves. Now the Harris/Biden Department of (In)Justice under one of the most corrupt Attorneys General in the last century, Merrick Garland, are going to the Supreme Court to block Arizona’s plan to have voters prove that they are United States Citizens. Here are the details from the Federalist:
The Biden-Harris Department of Justice (DOJ) on Friday requested the U.S. Supreme Court “deny” Republicans’ bid to enforce an Arizona law requiring individuals to prove they’re U.S. citizens when registering and voting in elections.
Arguing on behalf of the administration, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar requested that the nation’s highest court instead allow a lower court decision — one prohibiting the implementation of provisions of the statute in question — to remain in effect for the November election.
Gee, I wonder why? Probably so they can steal the election in Arizona without any serious problems.
As The Federalist previously reported, the 2022 law mandated residents to show documentary proof of citizenship (DPOC) when registering via state voter registration forms. The statute also required such proof for individuals submitting mail-in ballots and voting in presidential contests.
(In Arizona, individuals who do not provide DPOC when registering to vote are permitted to do so as “federal-only voters” and cast ballots in federal elections).
So they put something in to NOT block people from voting in the presidential, congressional or senatorial races? So what’s the problem then? Oh, I know. They need to steal all the state and local elections too. (Not like it wold be the first time either)
The Republican National Committee and Arizona’s GOP legislative leadership filed an emergency application with the Supreme Court on Aug. 8, asking the justices to place a stay on the lower 9th Circuit Court’s decision and allow the law’s DPOC requirements to take effect for the 2024 election. Nearly half the country’s state attorneys general and several conservative organizations have since filed amicus briefs with the high court requesting a stay be issued.
We really need to do something about the 9th Circus. They have been out of control for decades and have shown utter contempt for the Constitution and the Supreme Court. Other then impeaching and removing the Communists on the bench, I’m not sure just what can be done.
In the DOJ’s Friday filing, Prelogar claimed “applicants are not entitled to a stay” and encouraged the court to “deny” such a request. Specifically, she argued that “judicial intervention at this stage would undermine the orderly administration of the election, risking the disfranchisement of thousands of voters who have already registered to vote using the federal form.”
I suspect that those “Thousands of voters” are not American citizens or might not actually be in the country legally. And, as mentioned above, for Federal elections, the law doesn’t apply in the first place.
The Biden-Harris administration was among several left-wing parties to sue Arizona over the law shortly after its passage in 2022.
According to AZ Free News, more than 11,600 individuals voted via “federal-only” ballots during the Grand Canyon State’s 2020 election. That’s larger than Joe Biden’s margin of victory (10,457 votes) over Donald Trump.
This was before the law was implemented I believe. I suspect it was the reason that the law was proposed in the first place. Arizona was one of the states where they had a lot of issues, (See Maricopa County), and with the thoroughly corrupt Katie Hobbs as Secretary of State, any questions regarding the validity of the votes was quickly suppressed.
The DOJ’s claims mirror those issued by Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, a Democrat, who argued in her motion opposing applicants’ request that allowing the law to take effect would be “destabilizing.” Legal counsel representing Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, also a Democrat, similarly filed a motion asking SCOTUS to “deny” the emergency application.
I find it interesting that it appears that only Democrats are opposed to this law and want it blocked.
Justice Elena Kagan is the “circuit justice” tasked with handling emergency stay applications from western states. She can “grant or deny the application on her own, or she can refer it to the full court for all of the justices to vote on it,” according to SCOTUSblog.
Well, then, it’s a done deal. Kagan is a communist Progressive Democrat and generally holds the Constitution in utter contempt. Most of her rulings are designed to favor Big Government, The Democrat Party and the Deep State at the expense of the average American citizen. She will rule in favor of the Democrats and insure that they have a clear path to steal the election in Arizona. After that, it will take at least 5 justices to reissue the Stay. I don’t know if that would happen. I can see Thomas and Alito supporting it. The other conservatives? They should, but will they?
It turns out that they did. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to grant an emergency stay to the order of a lower court blocking the law. Here are the details from Fox News:
A federal judge had blocked enforcement of the law, which prompted the appeal to the high court for temporary relief.
I don’t have the name of the original judge, but I suspect it was probably an Obama or Biden appointee. They almost always issue rulings that are very questionable.
When it came to ruling, Justice Thomas, Justice Alito and Justice Gorsuch would have granted the application in full, while Justice Sotomayor, Justice Kagan, Justice Barrett and Justice Jackson would have denied the application in full.
Barrett is beginning to turn out to be a mistake similar to Sandra Day O’Conner.
Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh provided a compromise of sorts with their deciding votes.
Roberts was a bit of a surprise of course. In any case, the law will be enforced until the full case can be heard. Frankly, this should have never been a question in the first place. It just shows how corrupt the Progressive Liberal Democrat Party is in their quest for absolute power.
Thatisall
(2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
~The Angry Webmaster~
