"That alternative means of enforcing its constitutional power to determine voting qualifications remains open to Arizona here. Should the EAC reject or decline to act on a renewed request, Arizona would have the opportunity to establish in a reviewing court that a mere oath will not suffice to effectuate its citizenship requirements." [emphasis added]I think this is a signal from at a minimum Scalia that once the NVRA process is followed, there will be a sympathetic SCOTUS majority.
Perhaps this is the way AZ or any other state could require documentation of eligibility for the office that individuals are running for. Pass a law saying that a mere oath will not suffice to effectuate its citizenship and eligibility requirements. IOW, WHENEVER there is a citizenship or eligibility requirement, documentation above and beyond a mere oath is required.
This should be done in every state.
The problem I see is trying to have it “established in a reviewing court”. The entire judiciary is compromised when it comes to serious issues, IMHO. For instance, the IRS intimidation extended to all judges in CA, IIRC.
[[I think this is a signal from at a minimum Scalia that once the NVRA process is followed, there will be a sympathetic SCOTUS majority]]
IF that were the case, why hasn’t this come before the surpeme court before now? There’s been an obvious lack of cocnern regardign illegal voting o nthe federal level for a long time now, and liek antoher person said, since our supreme court hadn’t ruled on this serious issue previously, it woudld then be up to the states to try to weed out the illegal votes, while contestign an election, whicvh would be narly impossible, and woudl drag on for ever, costign tons of money- so the federal gove3nrment knows states are unlikely to do this and so they don’t really give a crap- niehter did the surpeme court apparently-
It ‘looks like’ they are indicating they ‘would be’ sympathetic, but sicne htis is such a serious issue, why hasn’t it been addressed before now if they are sympathetic? We’re talkign abotu electiosn beign stolen because of illegal voting o na masive scale-
At any rate, EVEN IF they do hear a future case, I do not trust the traitor John Roberts any logner-