Optimism that SCOTUS will uphold election protections

As reported last week by One News Now, the U.S. Supreme Court is considering a case in which the Democratic National Committee is challenging Arizona's voting procedures – specifically, the state's practice of discarding out-of-precinct provisional votes; and disallowing third-party groups to collect and deliver completed vote-by-mail ballots, a process known as "ballot harvesting."

The DNC claims the provisional ballot rule has a disparate impact on minority citizens; and banning of ballot harvesting undermines the civil rights of minorities. Two federal courts agreed Arizona's law did not harm minorities' participation in elections; however, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overruled those two lower courts.

Michael J. O'Neill serves as assistant general counsel at the Landmark Legal Foundation and authored a brief in this case. "Essentially what Democrats argued was that these two policies disproportionately impacted minority voters [and] therefore are deemed unconstitutional and illegal," he explains.

O'Neill says this case could have serious consequences if the high court doesn't overturn the ruling by the Ninth Circuit. "You will see dozens and dozens of challenges of any and all state laws," he warns.

"In other words, if you have to put a stamp on your ballot … if you have to have a witness sign your absentee ballot to attest that you are who you say you are … if you have to request an absentee ballot as opposed to just having it mailed to you through no action of yourself – Democrats will challenge any of these protections and they will be thrown out unless the court acts."

The LLF attorney is guardedly optimistic that the high court will act properly and overturn the Ninth Circuit's decision – ensuring that states may continue to implement commonsense protections for a method of voting that is outside the security of the election booth and inherently vulnerable.