Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Voting Restrictions

July 1, 2021 by Dan McCue
Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Voting Restrictions

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled Thursday to uphold two provisions of Arizona’s election law that critics argued unfairly impinged on the rights of Black, Hispanic and Native Americans voters.

By a 6-3 margin, the justices held that a 2016 law that limits who can return early ballots for another person and a separate policy of discarding ballots cast in the wrong precinct do not violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

The division on the court was along strict ideological lines, with all of the conservatives in the majority, and the liberals banding together in dissent.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote the opinion for the majority, but it’s Justice Elena Kagan’s much longer dissent that made for the most interesting reading Thursday.

Kagan wrote that the majority’s ruling “undermines Section 2 and the right it provides” because of what she described as the conservative justices’ “cramped reading” or “broad language” to justify upholding the restrictions.

The justice went on to say that the Voting Rights Act “represents the best of America” but added that “if a single statute reminds us of the worst of America” it is also the Voting Rights Act.

That is “because it was — and remains — so necessary,” she wrote.

The court’s decision could make it harder to challenge the score of voting restrictions that have been adopted or have been under consideration in GOP-led states since the 2020 election.

Thursday’s ruling reversed a 9th Circuit decision that struck down the restrictions as racially discriminatory.

Both Democrats and Republicans had used ballot collection in Arizona to boost turnout during elections by going door to door and asking voters if they had completed their mail-in ballots, but Democrats have historically been more successful at it.

The practice is considered particularly useful to the state’s Native American population because polling places can be far away and mail service isn’t always reliable.

Voters who hadn’t voted were urged to do so, and the volunteers offered to take the ballots to election offices. 

Republicans who control the legislature made a crime of ballot collection, dubbed ballot harvesting, other than for family members and caregivers. 

It is estimated that 80% of the state’s voters use mail-in ballots or vote early in person.

Thursday’s decision is yet another sign that a more conservative Supreme Court is comfortable with winnowing down the scope of the Voting Rights Act.

In 2013, the court invalidated the “preclearance” provision of the Voting Rights Act, which requireed states and local governments to clear voting rule changes with the federal government if they had a history of discrimination.

Six years later, in a case that affected voting rights if not the Act directly, it held that federal courts can’t weigh in on any case involving partisan gerrymandering.

Sean Morales-Doyle, acting director of the Voting Rights and Elections Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School, said in a statement that the Supreme Court on Thursday “made it much harder to challenge discriminatory voting laws in court. 

“The justices stopped short of eviscerating the Voting Rights Act, but nevertheless did significant damage to this vital civil rights law and to the freedom to vote. Congress must act now to strengthen voting rights by passing the For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act,” he added.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder said the Supreme Court’s decision “sends a clear message to voters across the country: We will not protect your sacred right to vote. 

“The laws at issue in [the case] are part of a larger, coordinated assault on our democracy being carried out in the name of ‘election security,’ that is based on the decades-long lie of widespread election fraud,” he said. 

“The impact of this activist, ideologically-driven decision will be felt in the future and far outside the borders of Arizona. These laws, and others like them, are unnecessary, and they will result in the effective disenfranchisement of countless American citizens – especially people of color,” he added.

Holder, who is now chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, went on to say, “Tellingly, this decision shows once again that this Court has little interest in protecting voting rights, and it makes the responsibility that is constitutionally supposed to be Congress’ all the more urgent. 

“We are getting by with an electoral system on life support — Congress must take immediate action to pass the For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to help mitigate the damage done in this case and in the disastrous Shelby County decision of 2013,” he said.

A+
a-
  • Arizona
  • Supreme Court
  • Voting restrictions
  • voting rights
  • In The News

    Health

    Voting

    Supreme Court

    June 21, 2024
    by Tom Ramstack
    Supreme Court Upholds US Authority to Tax Citizens’ Foreign Investments

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld a Trump-era tax on foreign income in a ruling critics say extends... Read More

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld a Trump-era tax on foreign income in a ruling critics say extends federal authority too far over international business. Before Congress enacted the tax in 2017, wealthy individuals and corporations would put their investment income into foreign stock... Read More

    June 21, 2024
    by Dan McCue
    Justices Uphold Ban on Domestic Abusers Having Guns

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday upheld a federal law that bans the possession of a gun by someone... Read More

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday upheld a federal law that bans the possession of a gun by someone who has been the subject of a domestic violence restraining order, reversing a lower court ruling. In an 8-1 ruling, written by Chief Justice John Roberts,... Read More

    June 14, 2024
    by Dan McCue
    Supreme Court Strikes Down Ban on ‘Bump Stock’ Firearm Attachments

    WASHINGTON — Dealing a blow to gun safety advocates, a sharply divided Supreme Court on Friday struck down a Trump-era... Read More

    WASHINGTON — Dealing a blow to gun safety advocates, a sharply divided Supreme Court on Friday struck down a Trump-era ban on “bump stocks,” an accessory used to turn a semiautomatic weapon into something comparable to a rapid-fire machine gun. In a 6-3 ruling, a majority... Read More

    June 13, 2024
    by Tom Ramstack
    Democrats Criticize Chief Justice for Supreme Court Ethics Enforcement

    WASHINGTON — Congressional Democrats criticized the Supreme Court's chief justice Thursday for failing to enforce ethics standards on the court... Read More

    WASHINGTON — Congressional Democrats criticized the Supreme Court's chief justice Thursday for failing to enforce ethics standards on the court as they consider a proposal to intervene. Lawmakers were discussing a Senate Judiciary Committee bill to impose a new code of ethics on the Supreme Court.... Read More

    US Supreme Court Rules to Preserve Access to Abortion Pill Mifepristone

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday ruled unanimously to preserve access to the abortion pill mifepristone, a pill used in the... Read More

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday ruled unanimously to preserve access to the abortion pill mifepristone, a pill used in the most common way to end a pregnancy. The medication was used in nearly two-thirds of all abortions in the United States last year. The ruling is the court's... Read More

    Supreme Court Has Lots of Work to Do and Little Time to Do It With a Sizable Case Backlog

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is headed into its final few weeks with nearly half of the cases heard this year... Read More

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is headed into its final few weeks with nearly half of the cases heard this year still undecided, including ones that could reshape the law on everything from guns to abortion to social media. The justices are also still weighing whether former... Read More

    News From The Well
    scroll top