News
Featured Image
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito authored the majority opinion to uphold two Arizona election integrity lawsChip Somodevilla / Staff / Getty

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 2, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The Supreme Court upheld two Arizona election integrity laws in a landmark case on Thursday. 

The high court ruled 6-3 in favor of a ban on ballot harvesting and a law that disqualifies votes cast in the wrong precinct, finding that the measures did not violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA). Justice Alito authored the majority opinion, which Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Barrett, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Thomas joined. Justice Kagan delivered a dissent joined by the court’s two other liberal justices. 

At issue was whether Arizona’s policies contravene Section Two of the VRA by denying equal participation for minority voters. “In these cases, we are called upon for the first time to apply Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act to regulations that govern how ballots are collected and counted,” Justice Alito wrote. “Arizona law generally makes it easy to vote.”

Democrats who sued Arizona argued that the ballot harvesting law (HB 2023) and the out-of-precinct rule disproportionately affected minorities, thereby violating the VRA. The court rejected those arguments, however, with Justice Alito affirming that “neither Arizona’s out-of-precinct rule nor its ballot collection law violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.” 

“Arizona’s out-of-precinct rule enforces the requirement that voters who choose to vote in person on election day must do so in their assigned precincts. Having to identify one’s own polling place and then travel there to vote does not exceed ‘the usual burdens of voting.’ On the contrary, these tasks are quintessential examples of the usual burdens of voting,” he said.

“Voting necessarily requires some effort and compliance with some rules.”

The justices related that Democrats “were unable to provide statistical evidence” of a disparate impact on non-white voters due to HB 2023. “And without more concrete evidence, we cannot conclude that HB 2023 results in less opportunity to participate in the political process.”

“The mere fact that there is some disparity in impact does not necessarily mean that a system is not equally open or that it does not give everyone an equal opportunity to vote,” Justice Alito wrote. “And small disparities should not be artificially magnified.”

Alito also pushed back on claims that evidence of fraud is necessary to justify laws like HB 2023. “And it should go without saying that a state may take action to prevent election fraud without waiting for it to occur and be detected within its own borders,” he said. “Section Two’s command that the political processes remain equally open surely does not demand that a state’s political system sustain some level of damage before the legislature can take corrective action.”

“Ensuring that every vote is cast freely, without intimidation or undue influence, is also a valid and important state interest,” Alito continued, citing concerns that ballot harvesting “can lead to pressure or intimidation.”

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Thursday’s case, Brnovich v. DNC, is the court’s first decision on voting rights since 2013, and bodes well for numerous state election integrity laws enacted across the country this year. 

Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger, who has been harshly criticized by Republicans for his handling of the 2020 election, told National Review that the Brnovich ruling “vindicated” Georgia’s new election law, SB 202. “We know that SB 202 will also be affirmed, if it gets to the Supreme Court,” he said.

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: Protect U.S. election integrity and oppose dangerous H.R. 1
  Show Petition Text
31411 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 35000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

House Democrats, in a strict party-line vote, recently passed legislation to conduct a massive federal overhaul of America’s elections and voting protocols, making the inconsistency, confusion, and funny business that plagued 2020 the new, permanent norm in our country.

The bill is called H.R. 1 (also known, ironically, as the “For the People” Act), and, if passed by the Democrat-controlled Senate, will mark the beginning of a once-in-a-generation transfer of power from the people of our country to its politicians.

That’s we must act NOW, and implore our U.S. Senators to vote against this dangerous legislation when it comes before them for a vote.

Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition asking all U.S. Senators to oppose H.R. 1 as a matter of national importance.

Democrat sponsors have attempted to promote H.R. 1 as a bill to expand voting rights in America, but, in reality, it is the exact opposite.

Among the 791-page bill’s provisions are the following:

  • Transfer of control over congressional elections from state governments to the federal government, even though the Constitution explicitly states that such authority belongs solely to states.
  • Automatic voter registration, which would require every state to add all eligible citizens to their voting rolls (unless they manually opt out) under the law. This would, additionally, shield illegal aliens who are automatically registered to vote from prosecution, without making an affirmative declaration about the status of their citizenship.
  • Mandatory early voting in all 50 states for at least 15 days prior to an actual election, as well as unlimited ballot harvesting and a 10-day deadline extension past an election for mail-in ballots to be received and processed.
  • Mandatory, nationwide mail-in voting, without any requirement that individuals provide a form of personal identification upon applying for their mail-in ballot. This would also require that those individuals who request a mail-in ballot be automatically registered to receive mail-in ballots in every election to follow.
  • Transfer of control over drawing congressional district maps from each individual state’s legislature to “independent” commissions – another power reserved, in the Constitution, for states specifically.
  • Federal funding of campaigns, which would use taxpayer dollars to match campaign contributions made by Americans citizens to candidates for federal office at a rate of 600% (you read that right – your money, being used to fund campaigns and candidates you may not support, nor even have the chance to actually to vote for).

And, that's just the tip of the iceberg.

If H.R. 1 passes the Senate and goes to Joe Biden’s desk, the American people may never participate in a free, open, and fair election ever again.

It is, therefore, imperative that we act to save our Republic from this disastrous legislation NOW.

Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition which urges all U.S. Senators to oppose the anti-democratic piece of legislation, H.R. 1, today.

And, after signing this petition, please CLICK HERE to DIRECTLY CONTACT your U.S. Senators by using the simple contact form LifeSite is providing, here. It is a simple, one-click process, and you don't even have to look up any of your Senators' contact information.

Thank you!

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

'Here’s the anti-people agenda of HR 1 on election reform' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/heres-the-anti-people-agenda-of-hr-1-on-election-reform

'Democrats’ horrifying ‘For the People’ Act would supercharge vote fraud, end America' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/democrats-horrifying-for-the-people-act-would-supercharge-vote-fraud-end-america

'The Democrats’ ‘For the People’ Act would make it impossible to hold free and fair elections in America' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/democrats-are-pushing-the-for-the-people-act-in-attempt-to-make-impossible-to-hold-free-and-fair-elections-in-america

**Photo Credit: Shutterstock

  Hide Petition Text

Georgia earlier this year enacted the Election Integrity Act of 2021, or SB 202, which includes provisions that mandate voter ID and limit ballot drop-boxes. The Biden administration’s justice department sued Georgia over the law last week, citing Section Two of the Voting Rights Act.

Conservative legal group Judicial Watch said Thursday that Supreme Court’s Brnovich decision “destroys the foundation of the Biden administration’s recent attack on Georgia’s election reform laws.” 

“It reaffirms that states may take action to prevent election fraud without waiting for it to occur within their own borders,” Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said. 

“This new decision rightly rejects the race baiting of the leftist partisans who pretend that neutral provisions to combat voter fraud (such as voter ID and bans on ballot harvesting) are presumptively racist,” Fitton added. “States can be confident that they can go full speed ahead to strengthen elections and protect voting rights with security measures such as voter ID and other sensible measures to make it harder to steal elections.”

Along with Georgia, several Republican-led states, including Arizona, Alabama, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, and Florida, have enacted laws this year designed to secure future elections. Texas Gov. Greg Abbot has called a special legislative session for July to address election reform in the Lone Star State, after he defunded the state legislature for rejecting an elections bill in May.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.