Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCOTUS UPHOLDS ARIZONA VOTING LAW!
Fox News ^ | Fox

Posted on 07/01/2021 7:10:14 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper

Shannon Bream just now on Fox: Arizona law upheld. Sounds like good news!

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arizona
KEYWORDS: arizona; ballotharvesting; braking; elenakagan; fraud; genderdysphoria; harvesting; homosexualagenda; media; scotus; voting
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-117 next last
To: CTrent1564

That’s what I’m thinking.


61 posted on 07/01/2021 8:50:40 AM PDT by Rusty0604 (" When you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat." -Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
Here's the Opinion itself for those who want the straight dope.

ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and THOMAS, GORSUCH, KAVANAUGH, and BARRETT, JJ., joined. GORSUCH, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which THOMAS, J., joined. KAGAN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which BREYER and SOTOMAYOR, JJ., joined

62 posted on 07/01/2021 9:01:47 AM PDT by zeugma (Stop deluding yourself that America is still a free country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

63 posted on 07/01/2021 9:07:30 AM PDT by Eleutheria5 ("The impossible happens all the time. You just have to believe." Will Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: pas

If minorities have no ID’s, how do they cash welfare checks?
If direct deposit to their EBT cards, I suppose they don’t need ID. But there many other benefits besides EBT food stamps. And they are not cards like the EBT card.


64 posted on 07/01/2021 9:08:59 AM PDT by entropy12 (President Trump saved Millions of lives with his warp speed push of vaccines, including my spouse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: kabar

“No ballot harvesting in Indian reservations is upheld.”

No ballot harvesting anywhere is upheld. The focus on reservations was the leftists’ tactic.


65 posted on 07/01/2021 9:37:30 AM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

I can’t believe Roberts didn’t side with his fellow leftists.


66 posted on 07/01/2021 9:38:10 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kabar; All
Voting restrictions? How about voting integrity. The overwhelming majority of Reps believe the election was stolen. We need to restore confidence in our voting system or the country is dead.
The upcoming revelations from AZ's audit, the first truly comprehensive forensic audit of the votes, will send shock-waves throughout the country.


This ruling means that Arizona's 2020 election was conducted UNLAWFULLY because the Ninth Circuit was totally wrong to intervene and order the law suspended during the election. In short, SCOTUS allowed a valid voting integrity law to remain suspended altering the outcome of the election. This is another reason for the AZ legislature to decertify the election results, not only for POTUS, but also Congressional races. This also makes it easier to disregard ballot stuffing found by the audit.
67 posted on 07/01/2021 9:40:04 AM PDT by Dr. Franklin ("A republic, if you can keep it." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

This is an extraordinary smackdown of Kagan by Justice Alito. Her bait was cheesy but still, wow, this is a coup de grace on the level of Justice Scalia in Heller.
"(4) Section 2(b) directs courts to consider “the totality of circumstances,” but the dissent would make §2 turn almost entirely on one circumstance: disparate impact. The dissent also would adopt a least-restrictive means requirement that would force a State to prove that the interest served by its voting rule could not be accomplished in any other less burdensome way. Such a requirement has no footing in the text of §2 or the Court’s precedent construing it and would have the potential to invalidate just about any voting rule a State adopts. Section 2 of the VRA provides vital protection against discriminatory voting rules, and no one suggests that discrimination in voting has been extirpated or that the threat has been eliminated. Even so, §2 does not transfer the States’ authority to set non-discriminatory voting rules to the federal courts. Pp. 21–25.

The dissent, by contrast, would rewrite the text of §2 and make it turn almost entirely on just one circumstance—disparate impact. That is a radical project, and the dissent strains mightily to obscure its objective. To that end, it spends 20 pages discussing matters that have little bearing on the questions before us. The dissent provides historical background that all Americans should remember, see post, at 3–7 (opinion of KAGAN, J.), but that background does not tell us how to decide these cases. The dissent quarrels with the decision in Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U. S. 529 (2013), see post, at 7– 9, which concerned §§4 and 5 of the VRA, not §2. It discusses all sorts of voting rules that are not at issue here. See post, at 9–12. And it dwells on points of law that nobody disputes: that §2 applies to a broad range of voting rules, practices, and procedures; that an “abridgement” of the right to vote under §2 does not require outright denial of the right; that §2 does not demand proof of discriminatory purpose; and that a “facially neutral” law or practice may violate that provision. See post, at 12–20. Only after this extended effort at misdirection is the dissent’s aim finally unveiled: to undo as much as possible the compromise that was reached between the House and Senate when §2 was amended in 1982."


68 posted on 07/01/2021 9:46:37 AM PDT by StAnDeliver (Eric Coomer of Dominion Voting Systems Is The Blue Dress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: fwdude
"I can’t believe Roberts didn’t side with his fellow leftists."

And Roberts is the "white man" bedeviled by Kagan in the dissent, for that very reason.

69 posted on 07/01/2021 9:47:43 AM PDT by StAnDeliver (Eric Coomer of Dominion Voting Systems Is The Blue Dress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
Translation of SCROTUS' ruling:

"We know the 2020 election was STOLEN"

70 posted on 07/01/2021 9:52:57 AM PDT by CivilWarBrewing (Get off my back for my usage of CAPS, especially you snowflake males! MAN UP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
Here is the full actual decision of the Supreme Court.

Alito wrote the opinion. Basically the line of argument is that all voting involves burdens and effort so you have to argue that this particular act imposes undue burdens that discriminates on the basis of race or color and that burden was not met.

71 posted on 07/01/2021 10:36:07 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CivilWarBrewing

It’s a reasonable decision, but the reason the majority is drowning in their own cess is their refusal to deal with the election fraud in the first place. Seven of the nine could not find the “shall have original jurisdiction” clause with both hands.


72 posted on 07/01/2021 10:40:50 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: All; NobleFree

They’re making a choice to move around more often it should be their responsibility to do the things required when anyone else moves. Dems don’t care if you move fifty times your vote should count whether you’ve updated your registration or not, no matter how the ballot get returned and who signed, if or how it’s been signed.

Support for states blocking ballot harvesting is great. When Dems continue to dilute the security of the vote by letting anyone collect a ballot and turn it in and dismiss features designed to ensure that ballot was cast by a specific eligible voter, such as signature verification, it’s clear their goal is not greater access. Their aim is to create systemic advantage for themselves and invite cheating using the fig leaf of anti discrimination to hide their motive.


73 posted on 07/01/2021 10:48:01 AM PDT by newzjunkey (America First - bring on Giant Meteor in 2021)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Dan in Wichita

Hate to be a pain, but this probably means when crooked states do awful things with their election laws, the supremes will probably back them up, too. Up


74 posted on 07/01/2021 10:50:03 AM PDT by Flaming Conservative ((Pray without ceasing))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Flaming Conservative

That’s why everyone must pay attention to electing the right conservatives as Sec. of State, state AG, etc.


75 posted on 07/01/2021 11:10:49 AM PDT by rfp1234 (Comitia asinorum et rhinocerum delenda sunt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5

No worries, the directly indigenous folks in my immediate family are on board with Truehart.


76 posted on 07/01/2021 11:28:26 AM PDT by Caipirabob (Communists...Socialists...Fascists & AntiFa...Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow; null and void; aragorn; EnigmaticAnomaly; kalee; Kale; AZ .44 MAG; Baynative; bgill; ...

p


77 posted on 07/01/2021 12:08:21 PM PDT by bitt ( A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Franklin

Good point. The courts and state executives changed voting policies and procedures without participation of the legislature. Totally illegal.


78 posted on 07/01/2021 12:19:00 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Flaming Conservative

Prefer that the states make these decisions rather than a centralized federal government that treats the states like administrative units, not as the creators of the federal government. The 10th Amendment is there for a reason. The Constitution defines/limits the federal government.


79 posted on 07/01/2021 12:26:29 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Flaming Conservative

I guess you never read the US Constitution. The state legislatures are THE election authority PERIOD.


80 posted on 07/01/2021 12:29:02 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-117 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson