2013 Supreme Court decision a blow to voter integrity

 Epoch Times:

Arizona lost one of its key protections on voter integrity after the Supreme Court in 2013 overturned legislation requiring a proof of citizenship for people who register to vote. This erodes voter integrity, Dan Farley, Tea Party Phoenix Metro President told The Epoch Times.

Although the state website says that persons “must be a U.S. citizen in order to register and vote,” it also says that proof of citizenship is not required when voting in federal elections. Voters are instead only required to prove they are an Arizona resident and U.S. citizen for state and local elections, Farley said in a recent interview on The Epoch Times’ Crossroads program.

“We might be able to protect our state currently but we are unable to protect our electoral votes and the leadership of our nation,” Farley said.

In 2002, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission introduced a national mail voter registration form through which people could register to vote.

People who use this federal form to register only need to check off on the form that they are American citizens “with no proof required,” Farley said.

Therefore, Arizonians tried to pass legislation that introduced a requirement to provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote and identification when casting a ballot.

The law, known as Proposition 200, was designed to strengthen voter integrity, Farley said. But the requirement to present a proof of citizenship was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2013.

Election integrity is especially critical if one candidate is leading by a narrow margin as in this year’s presidential race where President Donald Trump and Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden are “only about 12 000 votes apart,” Farley said.

If people who are not U.S. citizens registered to vote in Arizona using the national voter registration form, then votes of legitimate U.S. citizens and Arizona’s electoral votes will be stolen, Farley said. This can “occur in every state across the nation because this is the gray area,” he added.

... 

The issue should be raised at the court again since it clearly had a negative impact on the integrity of the vote.  There is likely a chance that the current court will reverse the prior opinion. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more