The time-honored Democrat strategy of branding everything they don’t like racist and discriminatory failed to hold up in court when it came to two Arizona voting restrictions alleged to have violated the Voting Rights Act.
According to CNBC:
One of the measures, known as the “out-of-precinct policy,” disqualifies ballots cast in the wrong precinct on Election Day. The other measure, known as the “ballot-collection law,” forbids most people except for family members to collect and deliver ballots to the polls. Republicans often refer to third-party ballot collection as ballot harvesting.
The Democratic National Committee challenged the two measures under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires elections to be equally open to people of all races. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the DNC.
Democrats (unsuccessfully) argued that these rules end up disproportionately affecting voters of color, and thus they violate the Voting Rights Act. The Arizona GOP and DNC have been fighting over the laws since before the 2016 election, and the case received renewed attention following the 2020 election as many Republicans accused coronavirus-era voting provisions of unfairly tilting election results in Democrats’ favor.
The ruling was 6-3, with Justices Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor dissenting. Writing the majority opinion for the court, Justice Alito said “[W]e think it prudent to make clear at the beginning that we decline in these cases to announce a test to govern all VRA §2 claims involving rules, like those at issue here, that specify the time, place, or manner for casting ballots.”
This decision comes at the end of the SCOTUS’ term of the year.
Matt Palumbo is the author of Dumb and Dumber: How Cuomo and de Blasio Ruined New York, Debunk This: Shattering Liberal Lies, and Spygate
Don’t miss The Dan Bongino Show
