Biden Administration Changes Tune About Arizona Election Laws | Eastern North Carolina Now

Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the John Locke Foundation. The author of this post is Mitch Kokai.

    Paul Mirengoff of the Powerline blog exposes the Biden administration's changing attitude about Arizona's election rules.

  • The Supreme Court's decision upholding two Arizona voting provisions has brought a sharp rebuke from the White House. Joe Biden issued a statement that begins, "I am deeply disappointed in today's decision by the United States Supreme Court that undercuts the Voting Rights Act, and upholds what Justice Kagan called 'a significant race-based disparity in voting opportunities.'"
  • The Department of Justice issued a separate statement on the decision. It promises that "the Department of Justice will never stop working to protect the democracy to which all Americans are entitled," and urges Congress to "enact additional legislation to provide more effective protection for every American's right to vote."
  • I would call Biden and his DOJ sore losers, except that the administration didn't lose this case. In a letter to the Supreme Court, the Biden Justice Department told the Justices it did not disagree with its prior conclusion, set forth in a brief by the Trump DOJ, that the two provisions of Arizona law at issue do not violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
  • Strictly speaking, there is no inconsistency between the DOJ's agreement that the Arizona provisions are lawful and Biden's disappointment with the Court's decision. The majority opinion didn't just uphold Arizona law, it also discussed the circumstances under which Section 2 challenges to "time, place, manner" restrictions on voting will be upheld. Clearly, Team Biden is not on board with that discussion.
  • But Biden didn't just express disappointment with the majority's reasoning. He agreed with Justice Kagan's complaint in dissent that the Court's decision upheld "a significant race-based disparity in voting opportunities."
  • If that's what Team Biden believes, why did it tell the Court when the case was pending that the two provisions under challenge don't violate the law?

Go Back


Leave a Guest Comment

Your Name or Alias
Your Email Address ( your email address will not be published)
Enter Your Comment ( no code or urls allowed, text only please )




Spain revealing the totalitarian future for all John Locke Foundation Guest Editorial, Editorials, Op-Ed & Politics Mainstream Media Outlets Criticize Biden’s Mouthpiece


HbAD0

Latest Op-Ed & Politics

anti-immigration conservative nationalist beats Social Democrat incumbent 2 to 1
Biden wants to push this in public schools and Gov. deSantis says NO
this at the time that pro-Hamas radicals are rioting around the country
populist / nationalist anti-immigration AfD most popular party among young voters, CDU second

HbAD1

Barr had previously said he would jump off a bridge before supporting Trump
illegal alien "asylum seeker" migrants are a crime wave on both sides of the Atlantic
Decision is a win for election integrity. NC should do the same.
Biden regime intends to force public school compliance as well as colleges

HbAD2

prosecutors appeal acquittal of member of parliament in lower court for posting Bible verse
Biden abuses power to turn statute on its head; womens groups to sue
The Missouri Senate approved a constitutional amendment to ban non-U.S. citizens from voting and also ban ranked-choice voting.
Democrats prosecuting political opponets just like foreign dictrators do
populist / nationalist / sovereigntist right are kingmakers for new government
18 year old boy who thinks he is girl planned to shoot up elementary school in Maryland
Biden assault on democracy continues to build as he ramps up dictatorship
One would think that the former Attorney General would have known better

HbAD3

 
Back to Top