In a little noticed court decision last Friday a federal court refused to enjoin North Carolina's state voter ID law from being used in this year's congressional midterm elections.
"A federal court ...smacked down the Holder Justice Department and refused to enjoin (block) North Carolina’s voter ID law, curtailment of costly early voting and end of fraud-infested same day registration. This means the state’s voter ID law will be in place for the midterm congressional (and Senate) elections in November......"This is a big thing especially considering the personal activism of the Attorney General in trying to suppress state enacted voter ID laws. Here's how the Holder smack down went as analyzed by two legal experts in voter ID law.
"Hans von Spakovsky, former DOJ voting official, says it is going to be a very bad weekend for lawyers at the Justice Department Voting Section. “Eric Holder has been beaten now twice in the Carolinas on voter ID. Today’s ruling shows just how wrong he is when it comes to election law.”
"Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch says, “It is an embarrassing defeat for the Holder Justice Department. The court’s decision eviscerates Eric Holder’s politicized and racially inflammatory legal assault on commonsense election integrity measures. The court expressly rejected the Department of Justice’s contention that minorities are harmed by commonsense measures that help secure honest elections. The court’s dramatic rejection of Holder’s legal theory shows that that the DOJ’s lawsuit, which was coordinated with political activists at the White House, was always more about cynical political and racial appeals than upholding the law.”In my life time of following politics and the American legal system, I have never heard a U.S. Attorney General publicly announce that he was proud to be an activist in seeing to the changing of laws that he personally felt were unjust for political reasons. The courts and Congress determine what our laws are. It is the duty of the Department of Justice, lead by the Attorney General, to follow the law as it is written.
We know and understand that the AG and the DOJ, that he
leads, have some discretion in which cases they will or will not
prosecute on behalf of the citizens of America, which may include
pursuing cases that could be reasonably viewed as violating
constitutional law. What becomes apparent with this latest court action
is that Holder personally invested his and Obama's political objective
to reduce the security of the election process for the sole purpose to
ensure greater participation of Democrat minority voters, rather than
trying to maintain or improve the integrity of the election process.
This DOJ attack to overturn the NC voter law actually opens up the
voter/election process to potential political corruption, when the NC
voter law clearly indicates an effort to protect and enhance the
security of the NC voter/election process.
The court found that the DOJ argumentation to overturn North Carolina's tightening of the voting process was counterintuitive and flew in the face of maintaining the integrity and validity of the election process for all legally eligible voters to ensure their votes count and are not diminished by corruption of the voting/election process by persons not legally eligible to vote in NC.
The court found that the DOJ argumentation to overturn North Carolina's tightening of the voting process was counterintuitive and flew in the face of maintaining the integrity and validity of the election process for all legally eligible voters to ensure their votes count and are not diminished by corruption of the voting/election process by persons not legally eligible to vote in NC.
Rob
Janicki
is Owner Operator and HMFIC of the website Wired Right
