Supreme Court upholds Arizona's Election Law

[Glitch]

In a six-page decision in Brnovich, Attorney General of Arizona, et. al. v. Democratic National Committee, et. al., decided July 1, 2021 the Supreme Court upheld Arizona's election law in a 6-3 decision.

Held: Arizona’s out-of-precinct policy and HB 2023 do not violate §2 of the VRA, and HB 2023 was not enacted with a racially discriminatory purpose.

This is when leftist freaks across the nation became unhinged, yet again, knowing that their attempts at election fraud has been thwarted in Arizona. Or as Salon puts it:

Supreme Court grants Trump's Big Lie a major boost in one of its last decisions of the term

The Supreme Court decision paves the way for other States to finally restore integrity to their elections after being destroyed by Democrats for all these decades.

 

[Loulit01]

This could so easily backfire on the right.

Kagan rips colleagues in blistering 41-page voting rights dissent​

Justice Elena Kagan ripped her conservative colleagues on the Supreme Court on Thursday in a blistering 41-page dissent, accusing them of ignoring the legislative intent of the 1965 Voting Rights Act as well as the high court’s own precedents.

“Never has a statute done more to advance the nation’s highest ideals. And few laws are more vital in the current moment. Yet in the last decade, this court has treated no statute worse,” she wrote, in what is likely to become a rallying cry for Democratic lawmakers and progressive activists pushing for election reform laws, including the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, in Congress.

Kagan rips colleagues in blistering 41-page voting rights dissent

Justice Elena Kagan ripped her conservative colleagues on the Supreme Court on Thursday in a blistering 41-page dissent, accusing them of ignoring the legislative intent of the 1965 Voting Rights A…

thehill.com

.

 

[Glitch]

This could so easily backfire on the right.

Kagan rips colleagues in blistering 41-page voting rights dissent​

Justice Elena Kagan ripped her conservative colleagues on the Supreme Court on Thursday in a blistering 41-page dissent, accusing them of ignoring the legislative intent of the 1965 Voting Rights Act as well as the high court’s own precedents.

“Never has a statute done more to advance the nation’s highest ideals. And few laws are more vital in the current moment. Yet in the last decade, this court has treated no statute worse,” she wrote, in what is likely to become a rallying cry for Democratic lawmakers and progressive activists pushing for election reform laws, including the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, in Congress.

Kagan rips colleagues in blistering 41-page voting rights dissent

Justice Elena Kagan ripped her conservative colleagues on the Supreme Court on Thursday in a blistering 41-page dissent, accusing them of ignoring the legislative intent of the 1965 Voting Rights A…

thehill.com

We've always known Kagan was a communist anti-American leftist extremist since the day Obama appointed her. Her 41-page mentally deranged attack on a 6-page decision is a clear indication that she is mentally unhinged like all leftist freaks.

 

[maxparrish]

This could so easily backfire on the right.

Kagan rips colleagues in blistering 41-page voting rights dissent​

Justice Elena Kagan ripped her conservative colleagues on the Supreme Court on Thursday in a blistering 41-page dissent, accusing them of ignoring the legislative intent of the 1965 Voting Rights Act as well as the high court’s own precedents.

“Never has a statute done more to advance the nation’s highest ideals. And few laws are more vital in the current moment. Yet in the last decade, this court has treated no statute worse,” she wrote, in what is likely to become a rallying cry for Democratic lawmakers and progressive activists pushing for election reform laws, including the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, in Congress.

Kagan rips colleagues in blistering 41-page voting rights dissent

Justice Elena Kagan ripped her conservative colleagues on the Supreme Court on Thursday in a blistering 41-page dissent, accusing them of ignoring the legislative intent of the 1965 Voting Rights A…

thehill.com

.

Maybe it will, maybe it won't but your quote compelled me to read at least the first several pages of her dissent. Frankly, I'm not going to read the rest unless someone seriously seeks to defend it here as convincing...with some citations and explanation as to why.

In reading Supreme Court opinions I have derived a rule: the greater the rhetorical flourish and appeal to statements of grand (and imprecise) meaning the more likely the opinion or dissent is a gaggle of personal feelings and not law. I developed this rule after reading a dissent by Sotomayor some years ago (can't recall the case) followed by Kennedy's majority opinion on gay marriage rights...Kennedy's being far worse than Sotomayor's.

Kagan, in the first few pages, takes the personal outraged feelings and grand intentions of the VRA approach, to the point that I stopped reading...if the remainder of the dissent is in this vein, its not of interest to me.

If someone who sympathizes with Kagen would like to produce something from it that speaks to clear statutory law and its applicability, please do so. Till then, I'll stick with my poor impression of Kagens 'blistering' dissent.

 

[HangLow]

Look like The RePukes caught a winner on this one...
Wiped out The Voting Rights Act of 1965
Voter Suppression by Zip Code NOT Race
Now you can get back to work on repealing ObamaCare
Congratulations...
-Peace
I doubt if most of you were born in 1965

​

 

[swing_voter]

Investigative editor Matt Doig points out that voting irregularities happen every election but, as our reporting has shown, are extremely rare and don't amount to negating a national election.

"A poll worker will accidentally mark the book to show that John Smith Sr. voted instead of John Smith Jr., and the Sr. is dead," he said. "Somebody who lives in Michigan will cast an absentee ballot there, and then vote in person at the precinct near his vacation house in Arizona. Someone will cast a vote for a spouse who died between the time the ballot was mailed and the election deadline."

Backstory: We investigated claims of voter fraud in the election. Here's what we found.

Are USA TODAY reporters looking into Trump's allegations of voter fraud during the 2020 election? The short answer is yes, but many are not credible.

www.usatoday.com

Voter fraud in the 2020 election was extremely rare.

1. You have to be a registered voter for your vote to count. If you're not on the list of registered voters, they throw your vote out.

2. You can't be on the list of dead people. If you're on the list of dead people, they throw your vote out. And it might trigger an investigation.

Think about it, there's not a whole lot of ways you can game that system. Modern computers can check these lists very fast.


Republicans are looking for a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

It's all to keep the loyalty of the trump supporters.


.

 

[Glitch]

I doubt if most of you were born in 1965

I was 11 years old in 1965. The very first time I voted was in 1972, for Nixon of course. I was in Marine Corps boot camp at the time and Nixon was pulling troops out of Vietnam. It was no-brainer.

 

[Glitch]

Voter fraud in the 2020 election was extremely rare.

Actually, voter fraud was rampant and wide-spread in 2020, as it has been in every election. But not by individuals. Individuals committing election fraud is indeed rare. I'm referring specifically to institutionalized government voter fraud, where the government is violating its own election laws. Or in the case of Pennsylvania, violating its own State Constitution.

There were at least 10 States that deliberately violated their own election laws in 2020, including my own State of Alaska. It is illegal for the government to mail out ballots without being specifically requested by the voter in Alaska. Yet two cities violated that law and mailed out ballots unrequested. As a result there were 111% more people voting in Alaska's 2020 election than were eligible to vote according to the Bureau of the Census.

This is not something new either. This occurs during every election. You may recall the 2016 General Election when Jill Stein demanded a recount in Michigan. That recount exposed the massive institutionalized government election fraud in Detroit.

Michigan recount reveals error, but not the one Jill Stein wanted

WASHINGTON — Green Party nominee Jill Stein’s presidential vote recount in Michigan may have turned up massive voter irregularities — in the Democratic stronghold of Detroit. Now it’s R…

nypost.com

 

[wellwisher]

Election fraud is easy, and can be done quickly and in bulk, with modern computers. Here is one way to do it, so that leak can also be plugged. Say a state has their registered voter rolls, all cleaned up so everything is legitimate. Come election day, a good voter turn out might be 65% of all these eligible voters. This means 35% of eligible voters did not vote. That then means the computer, late on election day, can be used to quickly identify the 35% of eligible voters, who did not vote. Some of these eligible nonvoters can then be voted for by the computer, to make the final turn out appear to be a robust 70%.

We do not double check all the eligible voters, after the election, to see if people actually voted and for who. If the computer added some extra eligible voters from the 35%, who chose not to vote, nobody would ever know, since all these were eligible. This appears to have been done in California in 2016, where they broke a record with over 70% of their eligible voters voting. This was above the national average. The extra percentage above the national average gave Hillary the popular vote. This turn out seemed very high, seeing Trump was predicted the winner before the California polls closed, and Hillary was not that good of a candidate. California then would not allow their voting, to be audited. This method of fraud would have been caught by simply contacting the latest voters, to see if they voted or were voted for.

Eligible voters have the right to vote, or the right not to vote, and this can be exploited.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Election fraud is easy, and can be done quickly and in bulk, with modern computers. Here is one way to do it, so that leak can also be plugged. Say a state has their registered voter rolls, all cleaned up so everything is legitimate. Come election day, a good voter turn out might be 65% of all these eligible voters. This means 35% of eligible voters did not vote. That then means the computer, late on election day, can be used to quickly identify the 35% of eligible voters, who did not vote. Some of these eligible nonvoters can then be voted for by the computer, to make the final turn out appear to be a robust 70%.

We do not double check all the eligible voters, after the election, see who will swear they actually voted. If you added some extra eligible voters from the 35%, who chose not to vote, nobody would ever know, since all these were eligible. This appears to have been done in California in 2016, where they broke a record with over 70% of their eligible voters voting. This was above the national average. The extra percentage above the national average gave Hillary the popular vote. This turn out did seem very high, seeing Trump was predicted the winner before the California polls closed, and Hillary was not that good of a candidate. California then would not allow their voting, to be audited. This method of fraud would have been caught by simply contacting the latest voters, to see if they voted or were voted for.

Eligible voters have the right to vote, or the right not to vote, and this can be exploited.

Ok, then do a count of paper ballots

Oh wait, that was done several times and in several states.

 

[HangLow]

I was 11 years old in 1965. The very first time I voted was in 1972, for Nixon of course. I was in Marine Corps boot camp at the time and Nixon was pulling troops out of Vietnam. It was no-brainer.

I was 15 in 1965...
I also voted for Nixon in 1972...
I went to Hanoi a dozen times in 1972???
-Peace

 

[Glitch]

I was 15 in 1965...
I also voted for Nixon in 1972...
I went to Hanoi a dozen times in 1972???
-Peace

The Marine Corps sent me to Okinawa in 1973 instead of Vietnam.

 

[HangLow]

The Marine Corps sent me to Okinawa in 1973 instead of Vietnam.

Look up LineBacker 1 and 2???
-Peace

 

[highroller]

We need to pass a new voting rights act to counter the RWNJ takeover of the supreme court.

 

[highroller]

Election fraud is easy, and can be done quickly and in bulk, with modern computers. Here is one way to do it, so that leak can also be plugged. Say a state has their registered voter rolls, all cleaned up so everything is legitimate. Come election day, a good voter turn out might be 65% of all these eligible voters. This means 35% of eligible voters did not vote. That then means the computer, late on election day, can be used to quickly identify the 35% of eligible voters, who did not vote. Some of these eligible nonvoters can then be voted for by the computer, to make the final turn out appear to be a robust 70%.

We do not double check all the eligible voters, after the election, to see if people actually voted and for who. If the computer added some extra eligible voters from the 35%, who chose not to vote, nobody would ever know, since all these were eligible. This appears to have been done in California in 2016, where they broke a record with over 70% of their eligible voters voting. This was above the national average. The extra percentage above the national average gave Hillary the popular vote. This turn out seemed very high, seeing Trump was predicted the winner before the California polls closed, and Hillary was not that good of a candidate. California then would not allow their voting, to be audited. This method of fraud would have been caught by simply contacting the latest voters, to see if they voted or were voted for.

Eligible voters have the right to vote, or the right not to vote, and this can be exploited.

Anyone complaining about election fraud after the number of recounts and audits from the prior election are either liars or stupid.

 

[prometeus]

We've always known Kagan was a communist anti-American leftist extremist since the day Obama appointed her. Her 41-page mentally deranged attack on a 6-page decision is a clear indication that she is mentally unhinged like all leftist freaks.

Good thing we have luminaries such as yourself to guide the nation to the truth. What would we do without you?

 

[prometeus]

Actually, voter fraud was rampant and wide-spread in 2020

Of course and that poor idiot Giuliani should have come to you for better info.

 

[Glitch]

Of course and that poor idiot Giuliani should have come to you for better info.

The idiot Giuliani was trying to get Trump reelected. That was never going to happen.

The President was determined on December 14, 2020 when all 50 States certified their Electoral College votes, giving Biden the majority. It still does not change the fact that at least 10 different States violated their own election laws, committing massive government election fraud.

Since the US Constitution is only concerned with the Electoral College vote when determining the President, the State legislatures can choose any means they desire to determine their Electors. Which means the States could have just flipped a coin, or in this particular case commit massive and very blatant government election fraud.

Either way the only thing that matters is that the State legislatures chose their Electors for the Electoral College and one candidate received 50% + 1 of the Electoral College votes. Which Biden did on December 14, 2020. There was absolutely nothing Trump, Giuliani, or anyone else could do to change that reality.

Or did you forget that it is the State legislatures that actually elect Presidents, and not the people?

 

[Aunt Antifa]

Pack. The. Court.

 

[LostInSeattle]

Actually, voter fraud was rampant and wide-spread in 2020, as it has been in every election. But not by individuals. Individuals committing election fraud is indeed rare. I'm referring specifically to institutionalized government voter fraud, where the government is violating its own election laws. Or in the case of Pennsylvania, violating its own State Constitution.

There were at least 10 States that deliberately violated their own election laws in 2020, including my own State of Alaska. It is illegal for the government to mail out ballots without being specifically requested by the voter in Alaska. Yet two cities violated that law and mailed out ballots unrequested. As a result there were 111% more people voting in Alaska's 2020 election than were eligible to vote according to the Bureau of the Census.

You keep spouting the same bullshit that has already been debunked in other threads. What a propagandist. A little bit of truth twisted into lies.

Yes, in 2020, Alaska had 11% more registered voters than they should have had according to Census data in 2020. So did a number of other counties and states around the country. Alaska has a high transient population; 5 to 7 % of the population enters or leaves each year. The state apparatus is slow to catch up.

However, there is no evidence that people voted twice in separate jurisdictions. In Alaska, 361,400 voted out of 595,647 registered voters, or 60.67%. That is actually lower than the national total of 66.7% of the voting eligible population.
SOURCE: https://www.elections.alaska.gov/results/20GENR/data/sovc/ElectionSummaryReportRPT24.pdf

This is not something new either. This occurs during every election.

I would think that it is much harder to pull off today than it was say, in 1960. Electronic voting machines with paper printouts that allow verification are hard to manipulate.

You may recall the 2016 General Election when Jill Stein demanded a recount in Michigan. That recount exposed the massive institutionalized government election fraud in Detroit.

Michigan recount reveals error, but not the one Jill Stein wanted

WASHINGTON — Green Party nominee Jill Stein’s presidential vote recount in Michigan may have turned up massive voter irregularities — in the Democratic stronghold of Detroit. Now it’s R…

nypost.com

There were problems with some Detroit precincts. The state audited the count:

"As a result, the state Bureau of Elections audited 136 precincts in Detroit that couldn't be recounted. One precinct — Precinct 152 — brought the problem to light when 52 ballots were discovered in a ballot container, but 307 votes had been logged in the poll book. Other precincts audited had similar problems.

'The audit found that the precinct imbalances, which did not affect the ability of Detroit residents to cast a ballot and have their vote counted, almost entirely were caused by precinct worker mistakes,' the state's audit said.

Problems included not properly using electronic polling books, leaving counted ballots in the tabulator bin instead of in a sealed container and incorrectly recording or issuing provisional ballots. Elections staff were able to bring 65 precincts into balance, and the total number of ballots in question was reduced to 200 out of 250,000 ballots cast in the city."

SOURCE: https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/09/detroit-vote-problems-election-audit/97690514/

200 out of 250,000 ballots cast is an error rate of 8/100 of a percent. Not great - with plenty of room for improvement - but hardly, massive institutionalized government election fraud.

 

[Glitch]

You keep spouting the same bullshit that has already been debunked in other threads. What a propagandist. A little bit of truth twisted into lies.

Yes, in 2020, Alaska had 11% more registered voters than they should have had according to Census data in 2020. So did a number of other counties and states around the country. Alaska has a high transient population; 5 to 7 % of the population enters or leaves each year. The state apparatus is slow to catch up.

However, there is no evidence that people voted twice in separate jurisdictions. In Alaska, 361,400 voted out of 595,647 registered voters, or 60.67%. That is actually lower than the national total of 66.7% of the voting eligible population.
SOURCE: https://www.elections.alaska.gov/results/20GENR/data/sovc/ElectionSummaryReportRPT24.pdf

So you are claiming that the city of Anchorage did not illegally mail out ballots without voters requesting them? Are you also claiming that Anchorage did not establish unsupervised drop-boxes around the city, violating the chain of custody requirement? Or perhaps you are claiming that Alaska did not count unsigned ballots with no addresses as valid votes?

Anchorage government election officials did not violate just one election law, they violated almost all of them in 2020. If you think you have somehow "debunked" those numerous violations of the law then you are truly delusional.

I'm not referring to individuals voting more than once. That happens, but very rarely. I'm referring to systematic government election fraud on a massive scale, and it is certainly not unique to Alaska. When cities violate their own State election laws, that is also called criminal election fraud in case you were confused.

I would think that it is much harder to pull off today than it was say, in 1960. Electronic voting machines with paper printouts that allow verification are hard to manipulate.

There were problems with some Detroit precincts. The state audited the count:

"As a result, the state Bureau of Elections audited 136 precincts in Detroit that couldn't be recounted. One precinct — Precinct 152 — brought the problem to light when 52 ballots were discovered in a ballot container, but 307 votes had been logged in the poll book. Other precincts audited had similar problems.

'The audit found that the precinct imbalances, which did not affect the ability of Detroit residents to cast a ballot and have their vote counted, almost entirely were caused by precinct worker mistakes,' the state's audit said.

Problems included not properly using electronic polling books, leaving counted ballots in the tabulator bin instead of in a sealed container and incorrectly recording or issuing provisional ballots. Elections staff were able to bring 65 precincts into balance, and the total number of ballots in question was reduced to 200 out of 250,000 ballots cast in the city."

SOURCE: https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/09/detroit-vote-problems-election-audit/97690514/

200 out of 250,000 ballots cast is an error rate of 8/100 of a percent. Not great - with plenty of room for improvement - but hardly, massive institutionalized government election fraud.

You would be wrong, but that is because you put all your trust in government. According to you, government can do no wrong. If they claim 1,000 people voted for a candidate when only 500 people actually voted, then obviously those voters were wrong and the government is always right. That is the problem with leftists, government is their god.

Those "precinct imbalances" in Detroit in 2016 were caused by Detroit government election officials deliberately putting false information on the district ballot boxes when they sealed them. It could only have been government election officials, because nobody else has that authority. Which is further proof that massive institutionalized (because it has been happening for decades) government election fraud is not just isolated to Alaska.

 

[LostInSeattle]

So you are claiming that the city of Anchorage did not illegally mail out ballots without voters requesting them? Are you also claiming that Anchorage did not establish unsupervised drop-boxes around the city, violating the chain of custody requirement? Or perhaps you are claiming that Alaska did not count unsigned ballots with no addresses as valid votes?

Anchorage government election officials did not violate just one election law, they violated almost all of them in 2020. If you think you have somehow "debunked" those numerous violations of the law then you are truly delusional.

No, as is obvious from my post. I was referring to your claim that, "there were 111% more people voting in Alaska's 2020 election than were eligible to vote according to the Bureau of the Census."

I'm not referring to individuals voting more than once. That happens, but very rarely. I'm referring to systematic government election fraud on a massive scale, and it is certainly not unique to Alaska. When cities violate their own State election laws, that is also called criminal election fraud in case you were confused.

You would be wrong,

Why exactly? Independent election experts and organizations - non governmental - put a lot of stock in current voting procedures.

but that is because you put all your trust in government. According to you, government can do no wrong.

Not at all. I never said or implied that. You are coming close however to claiming that government can do no right.

If they claim 1,000 people voted for a candidate when only 500 people actually voted, then obviously those voters were wrong and the government is always right. That is the problem with leftists, government is their god.

Really? I'll have to ask a "leftist" about that the next time I see one. I do not have complete faith in government, though you apparently have zero faith in government. Government officials are people, just like you and me. Many people who work in elections are volunteers, citizens who have a love for and faith in their country and its governance. It's easy for you to abstract that to some nebulous, gigantic conspiracy, but that's just not how local government works.

Those "precinct imbalances" in Detroit in 2016 were caused by Detroit government election officials deliberately putting false information on the district ballot boxes when they sealed them. It could only have been government election officials, because nobody else has that authority.

Have you read the audit report? I haven't. Just curious whether you're basing that on anything real or just your supposition.

Which is further proof that massive institutionalized (because it has been happening for decades) government election fraud is not just isolated to Alaska.

I think you need to look up the word "massive."

 

[Glitch]

No, as is obvious from my post. I was referring to your claim that, "there were 111% more people voting in Alaska's 2020 election than were eligible to vote according to the Bureau of the Census."

There were 111% more ballots issued than those eligible to vote. That was primarily because the city of Anchorage violated State election laws and mailed ballots to registered voters who never requested a ballot.

Under Alaska's election law there are only two legal ways of obtaining a ballot: 1) In person, at any of the district polls; or 2) By the voter specifically requesting an absentee ballot.

Why exactly? Independent election experts and organizations - non governmental - put a lot of stock in current voting procedures.

What do these so-called "independent election experts and organizations" say when those current voting procedures are not followed? Or are you that deluded to believe that government can do no wrong, like your stereotypical leftist?

Not at all. I never said or implied that. You are coming close however to claiming that government can do no right.

You have implied it, "[t]he state apparatus is slow to catch up." You just have to manufacture excuses for government crimes. I understand completely. The mindset of a true leftist.

Under those "current voting procedures" only those ballots that have an address and a signature may be counted as a valid vote. Yet there are thousands of ballots in Anchorage that contained neither.

Alaska election law does not prohibit cities establishing drop boxes, however, the law does require those drop-boxes to be supervised, and once again the city of Anchorage failed to comply with the law.

Many people who work in elections are volunteers, citizens who have a love for and faith in their country and its governance.

And look at where the government election officials put all those citizen volunteers who were there to observe those "current voting procedures." In the back of the room, if they were even allowed in the room, where they could see absolutely nothing. That kind of defeats the purpose of having observers, doesn't it?

It's easy for you to abstract that to some nebulous, gigantic conspiracy, but that's just not how local government works.

Have you read the audit report? I haven't. Just curious whether you're basing that on anything real or just your supposition.

I think you need to look up the word "massive."

What audit? Do you truly believe government is going to deliberately expose that they have not been following those "current voting procedures" and committing intentional election fraud? There has been no audit of any of the "current voting procedures" to determine whether or not they are actually being followed, and there never will be.

In the context that I used the word:

Definition of massive
2

b large in scope or degree​

c​

(1) large in comparison to what is typical;​

(2) being extensive and severe;​

Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/massive

 

[Luce]

We've always known Kagan was a communist anti-American leftist extremist since the day Obama appointed her. Her 41-page mentally deranged attack on a 6-page decision is a clear indication that she is mentally unhinged like all leftist freaks.

Well, it's a good thing you're not any kind of freak. Obviously well-spoken and well-mannered, etc.

 

[Luce]

There were 111% more ballots issued than those eligible to vote. That was primarily because the city of Anchorage violated State election laws and mailed ballots to registered voters who never requested a ballot.

Sounds like Alaska needs an audit from some shady guys out of Florida & NYC.