A conservative attorney says it's time for the U.S. Supreme Court to throw out the archaic Voting Rights Act, which has been used by the Obama administration as a battering ram against certain states trying to pass voter ID laws.
A federal court ruled against a Texas law on Thursday that would require voters to present photo IDs to election officials before being allowed to cast ballots in November. A three-judge panel in Washington ruled that the law imposes "strict, unforgiving burdens on the poor" and noted that racial minorities in Texas are more likely to live in poverty.
Justin Danhof, general counsel for the National Center for Public Policy Research, contends U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder was politically motivated in challenging the law.
"His push to allow voter fraud to increase across this country was upheld by a DC Circuit panel of three judges -- one appointed by Barack Obama himself, another appointed by Bill Clinton," he explains to OneNewsNow. "It's a victory for those who want to commit voter fraud, and a sad day for those who want to see secure elections."
Danhof argues that the Supreme Court needs to get rid of Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act because it "treats the states differently."
"It's a remnant of a bygone era that no longer has a place in American society," he states. "It treats some states as being inherently racist, and some northern states as being inherently neutral -- and that's just not the way modern-day America works."
The ruling against the Texas voter ID statute comes in the same week that a federal court struck down the state's redistricting plan, also based on Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.