Georgia responds to DOJ attack on voter integrity laws

 National Review:

The state of Georgia has filed a motion to dismiss the Department of Justice (DOJ) lawsuit aimed at its new, much-maligned election integrity law, S.B. 202, calling the legal action “a politicized intrusion into the State of Georgia’s constitutional authority to regulate the ‘time, place, and manner’ of its election.”

Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger concurred, saying in a Friday interview with National Review that “the left” had an “agenda” that they were going to push regardless of what the state’s legislature did.

“No matter what was passed, they were going to be against it and the DOJ just, in effect parroted what was already out there with the misinformation, the disinformation,” he asserted. “What you saw is that Stacey Abrams and her allies, two weeks before the bill was even passed bought ‘Jim Crow 2.0,’ and they hadn’t even finalized what the reading of the bill was.”

Both Raffensperger and the motion itself allege that the lawsuit fails to pass muster on a number of fronts. Most crucially, the plaintiffs predict that the law will prevent African Americans and other racial minorities from voting but the law has not been around long enough for any such result to have materialized.

“The Department of Justice has talked about what’s going to happen in the future, but Section 2 [of the Civil Rights Act] never talks about what could happen, it’s based on a results claim. There are no results,” explained Raffensperger.

Section 2 of the Civil Rights Act reads “No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision in a manner which results in a denial or abridgment of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.”
...

 What makes the DOJ case preposterous is that the alleged restrictions in the Georgia law are less than the restrictions in states that have never been sued over them.  On its face, the DOJ effort looks like an effort to make it easier for Democrats to cheat.  It is partisan BS dressed in a legal suit.

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