Optimism that SCOTUS will uphold election protections

Monday, March 8, 2021
 | 
Chad Groening (OneNewsNow.com)

Vote Here (sign)A national public interest law firm says "voter chaos ensues when protections are removed" – and that's why it has filed a legal brief in an election integrity lawsuit before the Supreme Court.

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.

Comments will be temporarily unavailable. Thank you for your patience as we restore this service!

We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article - NOT another reader's comments. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved. More details

SIGN UP FOR OUR DAILY NEWS BRIEF

FEATURED PODCAST

VOTE IN OUR POLL

The best description for major corporations coordinating to fight election laws is…

CAST YOUR VOTE

GET PUSH NOTIFICATIONS

SUBSCRIBE

LATEST AP HEADLINES

Fires, damage at Oakland protest against police brutality
Iran names suspect in Natanz attack, says he fled country
Russia detains Ukrainian consul over classified information
Police ID killer in FedEx shooting as 19-year-old man
Biden's Justice Dept. takes steps to target local police
Police left confused over directive from Minnesota mayor

LATEST FROM THE WEB

Indiana Fedex shooting massacre: Names of victims revealed
Opinion — Ariz. AG Mark Brnovich: Supreme Court vs. cancel culture – here's how justices can strike a blow for liberty
Conservative House Republicans to form 'America First' caucus, release Trump-inspired platform
Can we finally start ignoring Fauci?
Understanding how 'critical events' lead to people getting killed by police

CARTOON OF THE DAY

Cartoon of the Day
NEXT STORY
High court issues 'strong strike' against Roe v. Wade

KY Gov Andy BeshearA pro-life advocate is viewing a recent Supreme Court announcement as a small but forward step.