Last month, staff lawyers in the Arizona legislature informed Republican lawmakers that a new proof-of-citizenship requirement to register to vote blatantly contradicted Supreme Court precedent — precedent made when another Arizona law was checked by the Court just a few years prior.
Justice Thomas, in his 2013 dissent, noted that while the National Voter Registration Act applied to all federal elections, even presidential races, “This Court has recognized, however, that ‘the state legislature’s power to select the manner for appointing [presidential] electors is plenary; it may, if it chooses, select the electors itself.’” He cited Bush v. Gore .
IANAL, but I thought that Bush v. Gore specifically stated it was not a decision that was to be used as precedent?
Did I “mis-remember” that???
Seems the fascist controlled states are determined to get scotus approval for the concept that the ideological majority in a state has the right to determine who in that state has the right to vote. Of course that would cement in perpetuity a fascist government in all states presently controlled by republicans.
What would stop that state from placing increasingly onerous requirements on voting eligibility so that even conservative but not completely fascist citizens shall be excluded as needed.
In truth it would mean our corporate supercitizens would cement their total control of our political process. It’s damn near there now but they’ll want to clean up the possibility that something like the last Georgia senate elections could ever again be allowed to happen.
Fascist AZers have a convenient learning disorder in pursuit of their corrupt ends.
If this gets to the Supreme Court, as planned, of course, that would be it. One state is all it would take. It would truly change everything.
Wouldn’t it be ironic if the ‘originalists’ on the court were reminded and found persuasive the argument that in the days of our founding fathers that as a matter of general principals if a potential voter swore on a Bible or otherwise affirmed that their statements were true then the poll workers believed rhem and allowed their vote unless challenged. The burden of proof was on the challenger to provide the proof. In all other matters involving situations which could result in the forfeiture of constitutional rights the burden of proof is upon the accuser. This “papers please” mentality smacks of a tin horn dictatorship.
So if I lived in AZ and registered to vote say 40+ years ago, I would then have to trot myself down to the county BOE to show them a B/C, passport, or what?
Has any reporter asked the Republican legislature how much money they have set aside to cover the cost of having the majority of voters re-register to vote? Will the state be picking up the cost to get replacement birth certificates, even if those original B/C were issued out of state? Will they demand that some states requirements to issue a replacement B/C is not rigorous enough to qualify under AZ laws?
Hey, folks:
One down, how many more to go?
The big question, of course, is what problem are they trying to solve?
The next question is, how many people will be disenfranchised by this law? And is that the legislature’s intention?
I think it was in NC where a hard drive came to light that indeed the people behind such bills were trying to prevent people from voting, not protecting the vote.
enceladus you hit the nail on the head. But the feds have a hammer as well in the form of Article IV Section IV Section 4, aka the Guarantee Clause.
With Biden in the White House and Ds nominally in control of Congress, they can wield that provision to overrule any state action which smacks of non-compliance with the obligation for states to have a ‘republican form’ of government and that the “United States” shall guarantee that they do so. This clause does not say that Congress or the President or the Supreme Court is responsible for it, only the US.
It doesn’t say anywhere in the Constitution that SCOTUS decides what the Constitution or even what laws means. SCOTUS took that power upon itself but it’s only custom, not law. Each branch has the power and duty to decide on its own what the Constitution requires and in many cases they leave decisions on issue to Congress or even just the Senate or the House. But since the “United States” makes the guarantee vis-a-vis the states, Biden can decide on his own to enforce that provision on the Constituion by sending in federal officers to insure that a state like Arizona doesn’t enforce a state law his administration finds contrary to the Constitution’s requirement that the state have a republican form of government. And he doesn’t have to listen to the federal courts or even SCOTUS on the matter.
Is this maximalist? Absolutely! Will a Republican president use it to their advantage? Of course. But what recourse is there?
Biden should use the full weight of his administration to ensure that the Rs in the states don’t turn 2022 and 2024 into a rigged environment based on the Big Lie and other partisan advantages they seek.
proof of citizenship
In order to vote, you must have a document which government will give you. Or not.
Republican government is definitely not government you can drown in a bathtub, or even an Olympic-size swimming pool.
Well, look who finally showed up to be deposed and decided to make a complete asshole of himself!
From the story:
Jones’ lawyer, Norman Pattis, also suggested the families’ lawyers have ulterior motives.
“I had the impression watching the attack on Mr. Jones that this trial will be about something far greater than what happened at Sandy Hook,” Pattis said on the video. “The trial’s going to be about ordinary people’s ability to say I’m not buying it, I want to raise questions, I want to draw my own conclusions.”
The Pattis quote here doesn’t quite match with its lead-in–nothing in there about the plaintiffs’ motives. As for what he does say, setting aside his lumping in Jones with “ordinary people,” there’s nothing wrong with being skeptical about anything. What is wrong was/is Jones’s going way beyond the “just asking questions” stage.
Again aiming a barrage right at their key demographic. My father, who I am relieved didn’t live long enough to see the current incarnation of the Trumpist Republican cult, was a pretty reliable Republican voter.
A few years before his death, he and my mother planned to visit me overseas. As such, they needed passports for the first time in their lives. My mom’s was no problem, but it took a year to authorize Dad’s, including providing a lot of evidence they had to find, including old census records and even school records (which they were fortunate to have onsite after 60 years).
His prior military service in Europe (ironically) didn’t help a bit; and he had never had a birth certificate. I guess in a family of 10 kids in the rural west, with no hospital, paperwork just didn’t get maintained so smoothly (except for the school, apparently).
I still suspect it’s a number game for Republicans. As long as more of “their voters” reach the polls than Democrats, all is good. The others are just acceptable losses, basic rights be damned.
Some other, good, voting news from Arizona, though:
First Alex Jones doesn’t know when to shut up and now Crackhead Mike also makes an asshole of himself as well!
I’m an AZ native, and love living here. I loathe the carpet bagging, celebrity-wanna-be politicians who come here from elsewhere and make life so hard for some, just because … reasons.
Justice Thomas must have forgotten that tidbit of information, just as he seems to have forgotten certain key parts of the Constitution.
“Crimes against humanity” ?
Justice is coming for you, little man.