Voting Rights

Justice Department Sues Georgia Over New Voting Restrictions, Claiming Discriminatory Intent

The lawsuit claims Georgia officials enacted restrictive provisions with the intent of curtailing the right to vote based on race.

|

The Justice Department filed a civil rights lawsuit today challenging several portions of Georgia's contentious new voting law, which the Justice Department alleges were enacted with the intent "to deny or abridge the right of Black Georgians to vote on account of race or color."

In a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, the Justice Department alleges that portions of Georgia's Senate Bill 202, enacted into law in March, violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits discriminatory voting laws.

The lawsuit is a signal that the Biden Justice Department plans to go on the offensive against a campaign by Republicans in statehouses across the country to tighten voting laws following baseless and widespread claims, most notably from former President Donald Trump, that the 2020 election was stolen.

"The right of all eligible citizens to vote is the central pillar of our democracy, the right from which all other rights ultimately flow," Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a press release. "This lawsuit is the first step of many we are taking to ensure that all eligible voters can cast a vote; that all lawful votes are counted; and that every voter has access to accurate information." 

The Justice Department is challenging provisions, among others, that shorten the deadline to request absentee ballots to 11 days before Election Day, limit counties' use of absentee ballot drop boxes, and ban churches and civic groups from providing food and water to voters waiting in line.

As Reason's Elizabeth Nolan Brown wrote, Georgia Republicans touted the legislation as an "election integrity" bill, but "to anyone whose brain hasn't been melted by partisan politics, it's a pretty transparent attempt to sway election results, or at least to play to voter fraud fears."

In a Justice Department press conference this morning, Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke said the bill was not passed in a vacuum, noting the rise in absentee voting and the rush to draft and pass the legislation.

The complaint also points to current voting trends as a factor in the passage of the law. "The General Assembly adopted these changes after Black voters began disproportionately using absentee voting, and Black voters will be disproportionately impacted by each of these new obstacles," the lawsuit alleges.

There was significant backlash over the Georgia legislation. Democrats and progressive groups called it "Jim Crow." Major League Baseball announced it was moving the All-Star Game out of Atlanta this July over the law. Republicans and conservative pundits claimed the criticisms were hyperbolic, and many of the provisions could be found in other states, some of them run by Democrats.

The law is already the subject of several other civil suits by progressive and voting rights groups.

Georgia officials condemned the Justice Department lawsuit.

"The Biden administration continues to do the bidding of Stacey Abrams and spreads more lies about Georgia's election law," Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said in a statement. "Their lies already cost Georgia $100 million and got the President awarded with four Pinocchios. It is no surprise that they would operationalize their lies with the full force of the federal government."

NEXT: CNN Memorializes America’s Trashiest Romance Writer

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. dying to see the arguments to square “voter suppression” and “600 million voting Georgians”

    1. Biden would have won by 700 million votes if it weren’t for those racist Nazi Republicans trying to take the franchise away from the poor, stupid, benighted niggers who can’t obtain free identification cards or prove who they are with a birth certificate or social security number. If you don’t want to take up the heavy burden of empowering the poor, stupid, benighted niggers then you’re a racist too!

      1. Wow, maybe ease up on the racial epithets.

        1. I just mute shit like that.

          1. Get off your high horse. He’s channeling the Democrats facetiously, and you two know it.

            1. True. Nothing is more racist than a democrat.

              1. Well, Republicans are.

                1. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings V VF are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
                  on this page…..VISIT HERE

                2. Oh look, it’s MoronGoddamnit, back to blather again.

              2. How many Republicans in office after wearing blackface?
                How about after being long-time members of whites-only clubs?
                How many children of Republicans drop the “N” word when talking to very expensive lawyers?

            2. It was gratuitous and unnecessary to make the point.

              An example. A gifted comedian like Dave Chappell can (barely) get away with it because he is mocking and funny as hell. He gets the court jester pass. The joke wouldn’t make it without it and he uses offensive words like that in a way we can laugh at ourselves for our silly racial prejudice. It is never mean spirited.

              Don Rickles was a master of that and he made fun across the board but you could always tell he did it with a warm heart.

              I did not read it that way. Make your own judgement.

              1. It was gratuitous and unnecessary to make the point.

                There is no humor in it for you because it is how you think.

                Rebbeca is saying your ‘quiet parts’ out loud. And it hurts to face what you are.

      2. Did reason publish any articles expressing outrage of the attempted federal takeover of elections?

        1. Nope. Commies run unreason and commie propaganda must flow.

      3. She is speaking in the only language that most of the blacks I work with on a daily basis understand. I live in Georgia, and work in a business that is approximately 75% black. I challenge you to stand in a group of them and understand a complete sentence one of them utters. It is unreal the level of ignorance than young Americans, black and white, have fallen to. The public schools teach to the lowest common denominator. The kids drop out by 9th grade in 60% of blacks households. There are no mothers and fathers in the homes to give the kids what we used to laughingly call “home training”. Only now it’s no joke. These kids are then exploited by the likes of Abrams, Ossoff, and Warnock when they are told it’s whitey’s fault that they are poor, when the blame belongs with the very politicians they vote for. No responsibility for having to feed, house, or clothe yourself, free cell phones, broadband access, and cable TV are all given to them by the federal government. We have morbidly obese black women at the age of 22 bitch and moan saying they’re poor while driving a better car than I have, they’re living rent free in apartments with 4 big screen TV’s, while their 6 year old has a better cell phone than most working people. Sorry, Garland is Holder two shades lighter. A white man who feels he owes even more to the blacks who, if left to their own devices without government aid, would be starving to death inside a year. The truth hurts. Rebecca may be a bit rude with her language, but Joe Biden, ably assisted by Teddy “Chappaquiddick Killer” Kennedy, called Clarance Thomas a house nigger and an Uncle Tom on the Senate floor in 1989 in an effort to keep a black man who wasn’t a liberal off the SCOTUS. Guess Hunter learned his language from dear old Dad.

        1. Perhaps you should get another job. Doesn’t sound like you like yours very much.

        2. Just remind democrat voters that the democrat party is the party of slavery, KKk, and segregation and they are members of that legacy.

      4. Wow! You are an ignorant fool and a troll. You fool no one.
        MUTE

        1. I might have gotten this comment for the wrong person. It is for
          Rebbeca AustelI

          1. I re read beckys post and I think she’s being sarcastic. am i wrong?

  2. Hey remember back in October of 2020 when questioning the states on their election procedures was totalitarian Nazi fascism that made a mockery of our cherished democratic institutions? Even when the changes were made by state courts in direct contravention of state and federal law? My how things change once the correct result of a properly “fortified” election have been certified.

    1. this is being done through the legislative process, and we can’t have that.

    2. “It’s not bad when we do it.”

  3. …to anyone whose brain hasn’t been melted by partisan politics, it’s a pretty transparent attempt to sway election results, or at least to play to voter fraud fears.

    Expanding absentee ballot use is an attempt to sway elections. DC statehood is an attempt to sway elections. Does anyone think the Democrats would champion either of those things if they thought it was the opposition that would gain advantage? Everything these people do is to sway elections, and seldom to make things fair or accurate.

    Now let’s see if Justice to goes after other states with similar election laws.

    1. This is the overall truth about actions from politicians that amazes me how few people realize. It is always to benefit themselves. To believe otherwise is so ignorant.

      1. Makes me laugh every time someone tell me they think the govt has their best interest at heart. I heard it a lot during the last year. Made me laugh.

    2. Expanding absentee ballot use is an attempt to sway elections.

      And this is why Republicans were generally in favor of it for the last 30 years prior to 2020. They figured they had a slight advantage in absentee ballots. Unless you think that Georgia Democrats had somehow secretly taken control of the state legislature to pass the laws that they just decided to roll back now. It wasn’t until Trump started in on it this last time that any Republicans were doubting it. Did Trump have anything at all to say about the 25% of voters in 2016 that cast ballots by mail? Not at all. All of the 3 million illegals that voted for Hillary had voted in person in states that didn’t require government issued photo IDs, right?

      DC statehood is an attempt to sway elections.

      No, DC statehood would allow several hundred thousand Americans to be able to vote for members of Congress. That most of those people vote Democrat is beside the point. And that is true of anything else regarding voting laws and procedures. Whether to allow no-excuse absentee voting, what procedures to use for whatever absentee voting is allowed, what ID to require to vote in person, how to maintain the accuracy of voter registration rolls, what hours to have for early voting, how many polling locations to set up, where to put the drop boxes and when to make them available, what you allow partisan poll watchers to do, how you draw legislative districts . . . everything should be set up without regard to which parties or candidates would be likely to gain an advantage.

      Given that partisan legislators and other elected officials are involved in running elections and setting the rules for them, it may be impossible to actually remove self-interest from the process. But as voters, we should be demanding that officials at least try and appear neutral. Any judge that can’t appear neutral in a case is ethically bound to recuse themselves, even if they don’t believe that they are biased. The Republicans aren’t trying very hard to hide their bias in how they are setting up these laws. Their defenses are clearly disingenuous, and sometimes downright obvious bullshit.

      If you follow the link I included above about the Texas bill that state Democrats managed to block, you’ll see that at least one state GOP legislator is blatantly lying about why the law restricted early voting on Sunday to 1pm. A state senator, during the debate over the bill, argued that poll workers needed to go to church, too, so it wasn’t about trying to suppress “Souls to the Polls” efforts that Black churches are known for. But then a state House rep claimed it was a typo, and that it was really supposed to say “11” rather than “1”, which is ridiculous. I looked at the actual bill, and it said “1 p.m.”, so the typo argument is obvious bullshit. Someone might plausibly type a “1” when they meant “11”, but people don’t type “1 p.m.” when they mean “11 a.m.”

      Most Republican voters don’t seem to care about this. They just want their side to win, so any manipulation is excused. Democrats’ outrage is at least mostly over being on the losing end of those efforts, rather than the principle, but that doesn’t make them wrong. If you really care about whether voters can have confidence in elections, then you should care whether all voters can have that confidence. And voters can only have confidence in elections when they can believe that neither side is manipulating them in any way.

      1. And this is why Republicans were generally in favor of it for the last 30 years prior to 2020.

        Bullshit. The only absentee ballots that really ever favored Republicans were the military ballots. That’s why Gore tried to get them disqualified in 2000.

        Most Republican voters don’t seem to care about this. They just want their side to win, so any manipulation is excused. Democrats’ outrage is at least mostly over being on the losing end of those efforts, rather than the principle, but that doesn’t make them wrong.

        Holy shit, Republicans want to win? And Democrats cry like bitches when they make that effort? What an unexpected development!

      2. That most of those people vote Democrat is beside the point. And that is true of anything else regarding voting laws and procedures.

        Whether they vote D or R is beside the point, but the fact that a disproportionate share of them directly dependent on the government for their paychecks is not. Even if you don’t think government employees voting for their own policies and giving themselves payraises isn’t a moral hazard, the fact that it creates an upper tier of citizens who can effectively raise taxes and ensure more finds its way into their own pockets should offend people on a civil/social level just as if Clinton were overtly violating the emoluments clause or Trump were supposedly doing so.

  4. Maybe it’s good, maybe it’s bad, but to say it’s all about race is dumb. The huge increase in absentee voting in 2020 should raise some alarms, at least. There is huge potential for fraud there and it’s certainly a legitimate thing for the legislature to address. Banning giving water to people waiting in line to vote seems like a bit much, though.

    1. IIRC the part about water is actually a much broader and more sound passage than it is given credit for. It outlaws ant outside group, ranging from campaigns to seemingly benign public organizations, from giving anyone 9n line anything of value. It then lists several things which includes food and drink. It then specifies that the bill does not prohibit poll workers from distributing snacks or drinks to people in line. It simply removes the ability of a partisan group to get face time at the last moment with voters in an attempt to sway them, even if subtly. It does not, however, categorically make all provisions of water illegal. It just has to be done by the apolitical poll workers.

      And I believe it would allow an outside group to provide water to the polling station for poll workers to distribute so as to keep it anonymous and retain as much integrity as possible.

    2. Giving people ANYTHING of value at the polling place is electioneering, and should not be allowed. Why is it so important that people be allowed to give people water? Are black people also not able to think ahead and be appropriately hydrated before they go to vote?

      1. The bill says poll workers van hand out water. These groups are free to donate water yo election workers for them to hand out.

      2. Well, I know I’d hold out for a lot more than a bottle of water before selling my vote.
        I see your point, but you can still bribe voters everywhere else, so I’m not sure if that part really makes any difference one way or another.

        1. It is more to stop intimidation under the guise of handing out water.

          Plus plenty of DNC linked groups tried to have raffles on returns for voting in 2020.

      3. Of course, the more important question is, why are voting lines so long in certain areas that voters are expected to make elaborate preparations ahead of time?

        1. Don’t know. I’m sure you volunteer to help since you’re so concerned, right?

        2. Jeez, I don’t know. Sounds like maybe figuring that out is a better use of the DoJ’s time than this performative nonsense.

        3. I hate to agree with Jeff, but nobody should be waiting more than 30 minutes to vote. The states need to fix this.

        4. Those are called county-level decisions. Not state level.

        5. Ah, good. You’re actually asking a question that could lead to enlightenment.

          Now, if we consider the case of, say, Fulton County, Georgia, we’ll notice that the elections board, which runs the elections, consists of two Republican members, two Democratic members, and chairman Alex Wan, a self-described progressive and Democrat. Similarly, we can see the county Board of Commissioners is majority-Democrat.

          So we can be sure of one thing — whatever decisions are being made that cause long lines to vote in Fulton County, Georgia, but not in other places in Georgia, they’re decisions being made by Democrats or people answerable to Democrats.

          So, why would Democrats be making decisions that force disproportionately Democratic voters to wait in long lines to vote?

          One possibility is that Democrat county officials are too stupid to make decisions that would shorten lines.

          A second is that Democrat county officials are too incompetent to implement policies that would shorten lines.

          A third is that the Democrat county officials are personally corrupt, and are taking payoffs to make decisions that result in long lines.

          A fourth is that the Democrats are deliberately creating chaos at polling places in order to make it easier for their confederates to commit vote fraud.

          But, tell me, why do you think Democrats are screwing up the administration of elections in Fulton County, Georgia?

          1. So we can be sure of one thing — whatever decisions are being made that cause long lines to vote in Fulton County, Georgia, but not in other places in Georgia, they’re decisions being made by Democrats or people answerable to Democrats.

            Did you see the part about how drop boxes are limited to 1 per 100,000 registered voters in counties with more than 100,000 people? County officials have to make their decisions within the regulations set by the state and with whatever funds the state allocates for elections.

            1. Part where? Is this in the new law – which doesn’t effect the past election. So they are limited in boxes? So what?

            2. and with whatever funds the state allocates for elections.

              Does just making up shit often win you arguments?

              Counties in Georgia have their own revenue sources and budgets. The 2020 Fulton County budget explicitly mentions expenditures and allocations for handling elections. Out of a general fund of $782 million, they spent a whole $15 million on elections.

              But, hey, if you want to pretend that the county budget is so tight, so lacking slack in things that aren’t as important as the right to vote, that the county couldn’t possibly come up with a way to increase the elections budget to 3% of general fund expenditures (instead of the 2% they spent), go ahead. It just makes you look like a liar and a fool.

              1. Jason can’t do anything expect parrot the bullshit he read on HuffPo and The Nation.

            3. Except that, before this law, GA law didn’t make any allowance for drop boxes. The 2020 election having them was an exception made because of COVID. So, the law actually ADDS the ability for counties to have drop boxes for votes.

      4. Well R Mac it seems the democrats think so.

      5. Are black people also not able to think ahead and be appropriately hydrated before they go to vote?

        Why should anyone have to wait in line long enough to vote for that to be an issue anyway? Maybe this is only an issue because lines in mostly white areas aren’t nearly as long as lines in minority-heavy areas?

    3. It was a huge increase in ballot fraud, not anything else.

    4. The huge increase in absentee voting in 2020 should raise some alarms, at least. There is huge potential for fraud there and it’s certainly a legitimate thing for the legislature to address.

      Republicans had believed that they had a slight advantage in absentee voting, which is why so many states controlled by the GOP had been gradually expanding absentee voting going back 30 years. Utah has mail in voting for everyone, in case you didn’t know, just like Colorado, Washington, Hawaii, and Oregon.

      I would be more likely to believe that Republican skepticism of mail in voting was sincerely about security if it had existed at all prior to Trump making it an issue in 2020. Trump himself didn’t seem at all concerned about it in 2016, when 25% of all ballots were mailed or dropped off absentee ballots. And why did Trump make a big deal about it in 2020? Because he saw COVID itself as a threat to winning re-election. His claims that mail in voting would be fraudulent turned what was a slight GOP advantage in the process into a big Democrat one as Trump voters were discouraged from using it. It is impossible to say for sure now, but imagine if Trump had encouraged his supporters to vote by mail instead of claiming that it would be rife with fraud? Do you really think Democrats would have had a higher mail turnout than Republicans then? He might have even won. Who knows?

      1. Washington, Hawaii, and Oregon have been going Democrat for 30 years, you dumbfuck.

      2. The problem, idiot, wasn’t and isn’t mail in ballots.

        The problem is mass dissemination of unsolicited ballots.
        The problem is no attention paid to chain of custody.
        The problem is courts allowing unverified ballots.
        The problem is courts declaring that ballots can be late
        The problem is that Democrats committed fraud of a thousand types to cheat their moron into the White House and it MUST not stand.

    5. Banning giving water to people waiting in line to vote seems like a bit much, though.

      *Mumbles to self about public drinking fountains being shut off because of COVID.*

  5. Fuck you you marxist shills. There is nothing in there that is discriminatory without first putting on your neo-racist Democrat glasses. The provisions are bog standard election integrity controls. You cannot stand against them without declaring yourselves against honest elections.

    1. It’s racist because Democrats think that all minorities are too fucking stupid and/or lazy to get the documentation they need or stand in line to vote.

      Because Democrats are huge fucking racist.

      1. It’s racist because Democrats think that all minorities are too fucking stupid and/or lazy to get the documentation they need or stand in line to vote.

        So, the data that showed Black and Hispanic voters in Texas lacked the few types of photo ID required by their 2013 voter ID law at higher rates than white voters is racist? The data that lines in areas with larger Black and Hispanic populations are longer is racist?

        I see how it is. It isn’t racist to try and set things up that way, or take advantage of racial disparities for partisan purposes, but it is racist to try and remove those racial disparities or to prevent people from taking advantage of racial disparities for partisan gain. Because to block some people from using racial disparities to their advantage assumes that minorities can’t overcome racism on their own!

        1. Are you saying blacks and Hispanics are too lazy to get an ID? Why are you so racist?

          1. No. No. No. He’s not saying they’re too lazy or that they *won’t* get an ID. He’s saying that because they’re black or hispanic, they *can’t* get an ID. Much less virulent and intrinsically racist.

        2. So, the data that showed Black and Hispanic voters in Texas lacked the few types of photo ID required by their 2013 voter ID law at higher rates than white voters is racist? The data that lines in areas with larger Black and Hispanic populations are longer is racist?

          Strange how you don’t link to ANY of that data.

  6. I mean, it was obvious this temper tantrum was going to come after the Republicans blocked the For the People Act.

  7. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

    Where in the US Constitution does it give the Federal government the power to dictate how States must conduct their elections? I may have missed it, but based on how different many States’ election processes are it appears that the State does have a good bit of leeway in how they choose to handle ballots.

    Georgia is not restricting absentee ballots cast by black people, they are restricting absentee ballots in general, so it would seem there’s no equal protection claim to be made. It also seems that the State does have an interest in curtailing voter fraud within its borders, this particular law may or may not be effective but lack of efficacy hasn’t stopped the government in any number of other legislative efforts.

    1. It does seem like thin ice. I am not in favor of the restrictions but the feds do not seem to have a strong case. I leave it to the legal beagles around here to get a better perspective.

      1. I don’t live in Georgia so it’s not my problem and not my decision, but I do get bothered about this kind of Federal overreach. The people of Georgia elected their State legislature and the State of Georgia has judges to keep their legislature in check.

        We don’t get laboratories of democracy if each State has to play “mother may I” with the feds every time they want to change something.

        1. Feature, not bug.

        2. fat mike “State of Georgia has judges to keep their legislature in check.” the only way to keep em in check is to stop shopping judges to find one who agrees with your case. One other way is to make 5 year term limits for ALL candidates elected and no switching houses.

      2. The goal isn’t to win, it’s to tie the new laws up in court until after the next election.

        1. +10000000000000

    2. I think the only provision is that the Constitution requires states to have republican forms of government. But the mechanisms for achieving that should be left to the state.

      1. Constitution says congress can create uniform regulations, but this has generally been for generic candidacy riles and the such, not for manner and means.

    3. Where in the US Constitution does it give the Federal government the power to dictate how States must conduct their elections?

      Article I, section 4, cl. 1 says that “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulation, except as to the places of chusing Senators That language was held, in Oregon v. Mitchell to extend even to the qualifications for voters for Senate and House of Reps. (Actually, that was only Justice Black’s opinion, but it carried the day, when added to the votes of four justices who held that the Enforcement Clause (section 5) of the 14th Amendment gave Congress the power to set voter qualifications for all elections.)

      1. This is interesting, although it would seem that saying “you have to let people vote from wherever they can fill out an absentee ballot” would indeed be altering the places of choosing Senators.

      2. Don’t try to quote facts to these morons. They don’t care.

        1. “Don’t try to quote facts to these morons…”\

          We’ve noticed piles of lefty shit like are are amazingly immune to accepting them.

    4. The Democrats are hoping to find judges who don’t know the Constitution. Then after they rule for the DOJ the Democrats can put them up for the Supreme Court. Like they did Garland.

    5. >Where in the US Constitution does it give the Federal government the power to dictate how States must conduct their elections?

      Interstate commerce clause.

      Seriously, how much money, how many people, and how much media poured into Georgia from out of state for the Senate runoff elections after November?

    6. Where in the US Constitution does it give the Federal government the power to dictate how States must conduct their elections?

      You might want to read the Constitution, Article I, Section 4. States are empowered to run elections for Congress, but Congress can make whatever regulations it wants whenever it wants that override state laws.

      The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

      And, of course, the 15th Amendment explicitly gives Congress the authority to enact laws to enforce equal voting rights by race, which could be argued to be redundant with the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment anyway.

  8. This lawsuit is bullshit naturally, but aren’t we all glad McConnell tanked Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court. At least he’ll be gone in 2025 when the GOP takes over again. Fucker plans to do a lot of damage in the meantime though.

    1. “2025 when the GOP takes over”

      LOL

      There is exactly one scenario in which Kamala Harris doesn’t win the 2024 Presidential election: Biden changes his mind and serves 2 terms after all. (In that case Harris wins in 2028.)

      1. And what will her credentials for the job be? She hasn’t done a thing of useful significance yet – NOTHING re the terrible border situation beyond throwing some money at some of the Central American countries – now there’s an accomplishment! Some cameo appearances at PC demonstrations – heavy stuff that!

        1. What creds did Obama have?

          1. Papa Joe said he was clean and articulate. AFAIK, he hasn’t said the same about Kamala.

      2. It’ll be a Weekend at Bernies situation if Slow Joe were to serve 2 full terms, given that there are amoeba that display more cognitive ability than Jao Bi Den. As for Commiela, in my 50+ years of watching politics I don’t recall seeing anyone less qualified for even the current position she holds, much less the most powerful political office on the planet. Now, if you consider banging the most powerful politician in California in order to get your start in the system to be an example of excellent qualifications then I will admit she is, as the ABA would say, “well qualified”.

  9. If one looks at the current Georgia voter laws and compares them to the laws in Colorado, Georgia is more lenient. Is this a sign of racism?
    Why does not the Justice Department sue Colorado?

    1. Colorado wasn’t in the Confederacy.

      1. Colorado went Blue. Georgia is still kinda Red.

    2. because Colorado is being taken over by the socialist riffraff from Kaliforniastan.

  10. Anyone whose brain hasn’t been melted by partisan politics wouldn’t quote ENB. She’s one of the worst, most dishonest partisan hacks here at Reason.

  11. “As Reason’s Elizabeth Nolan Brown wrote, Georgia Republicans touted the legislation as an “election integrity” bill, but “to anyone whose brain hasn’t been melted by partisan politics, it’s a pretty transparent attempt to sway election results, or at least to play to voter fraud fears.”

    This is horseshit, but even if it wasn’t, what wrong with taking the fears of voter fraud into consideration? When did it become unconstitutional for politicians to listen to the concerns of their constituents? What kind of elitism faults legislation for being representative of the voters and their concerns? For goodness’ sake, if you’re opposed to democracy in all cases on principle, why don’t you say so?

    1. ENB is such an obvious shill. I bet her proggie husband’s boyfriend wrote that for her.

      1. It certainly looks like her elitist mask is slipping when she faults politicians for concerning themselves with the fears of their constituents.

        The legitimate purpose of libertarian government is not so the elite can inflict their will on an unwilling population. What’s wrong with worrying about voter fraud?

        1. The mask slipping is the claim that attempts to stop obvious election fixing tactics by the Democrats is what is partisan, not the Democrats changing election rules at the last minute, behind closed doors and against election laws. Or somehow losing ground among minorities, yet having record one sided turnouts in key battleground states, only in cities, only with absentee ballots and only in cities that had massive delays in vote counting.

          When key Democrat strategists were warning that Election night, Trump would appear to win by a landslide, but after the appeals and recounts, Biden would win in a landslide, you should have suspected something weird was afoot. Biden was up 16 at that time. Nobody should have been predicting a close race. Yet everyone was happy with the prediction of a Trump landslide election night, only to see it overturned in the following days.

          Missing all of that isn’t elitist. It is motivated reasoning. It means you were on a team, even if you didn’t think you were. And that team was not team L. It was team D.

          1. “Or somehow losing ground among minorities, yet having record one sided turnouts in key battleground states, only in cities, only with absentee ballots and only in cities that had massive delays in vote counting.”

            This can’t be said enough. The election data is inconsistent within itself, with the result determined by statistically impossible outliers from a handful of locations that all paused their counts in the middle of the night, contradictory to all indicators.

            “When key Democrat strategists were warning that Election night, Trump would appear to win by a landslide, but after the appeals and recounts, Biden would win in a landslide, you should have suspected something weird was afoot. Biden was up 16 at that time.”

            People can go back to the Reason threads from October to see you, me, and others making these points. They were telling us they were going to cheat, which is why even Reason was required to run preemptive “it can’t happen here” articles.
            Even now you see some ostensibly nonpartisan posters here fall back on the “Trump was uniquely hated” canard, conspicuously avoiding his improved performance among all demographics but “whites”, 35 million more votes than ever cast, and absentee ballot ratios that are both inconsistent between locales and cannot be correlated to any legitimate causes.

    2. Looking out for the reasonable concerns of your constituents is one thing. But if those concerns are patently unreasonable, like believing voter fraud is rampant enough to turn the election, then it’s not especially praiseworthy to cater to them.

      Interesting to note that Raffensperger is the same guy that told Trump to pound sand when Trump told him to find the allegedly missing votes for him.

  12. Helps Brian Kemp. Hurts Stacy Abrams. But Biden will get bonus – or is it bogus? – proggy points for fighting the good fight.

    And of course this is about partisan politics. Stacy Abrams worked very hard to pressure the election system. It was only logical that Republicans would try to head that off in future elections.

  13. And what will her credentials for the job be? She hasn’t done a thing of useful significance yet – NOTHING re the terrible border situation beyond throwing some money at some of the Central American countries – now there’s an accomplishment! Some cameo appearances at PC demonstrations – heavy stuff that!

  14. It’s already over.
    They got away with rigging an election out in the open. What’s to keep them from doing it again.
    The current administration is illegitimate, but they don’t care.
    They are at war with you.

    1. Totally agree.

      I’m confused why people think it will be different in 2022 & 2024.

      They know they can do it now, and will uses racism as the cover with the MSM as their propaganda machine.

      People are nuts if they think it will turn around now.

  15. It’s this simple: If you want to enact laws making it easy to commit fraud, it’s because you intend to commit fraud.

  16. Georgia is a state where there was real election interference and we have evidence of this interference. There is evidence that former President soliciting to have votes found to change the election in his favor. There are tapes of these conversations. And yet it is the people who voted that the Georgia legislature seeks to punish with new restrictive voting laws. How about tougher penalties for trying to influence the election officials.

    Instead of the legislature trying to investigate the vote let them investigate the former President.

    1. You don’t even know who Marx was.

    2. Odd that literally none of what you wrote was truthful. Weird.

      1. You might think my response was so off topic as to be bizarre, but earlier this week I quoted Marx, without acknowledging it was Marx’s quote. M4E liked the sound of it. He’s truly the lowest IQ, knowledgeable, poster on the site.

        1. Yeah, he’s a massive idiot. At least we now know who watches CNN and thinks that it’s real news.

          1. I read, you should try it. Former President got too much of his news from TV and it showed. He was ignorant on most issues.

            1. You didn’t know Marx’s famous quote was Marx.

            2. …yet he was correct on far more issues than the news was. Isn’t that odd?

            3. “I read, you should try it…”

              I do too. Something other than Parade Magazine.
              You should try it, and also try not moving your mouth as you read the words, you pathetic piece of shit.

              1. My 8 yr. old is a prodigous reader too. Of course, he just regurgitates it with no meaning, understanding, or context, but he gets a real sense of pride and self-worth when he tells people that he likes to read and they tell him that that’s good.

      2. Check the tapes they out there. All reported in the press. Real election tampering done by former President.

        1. I heard them.

          You clearly heard a reporter’s interpretation of them, and to quote Ben Rhodes, reporters do not know anything.

        2. I’ve seen the tapes of poll workers lying to clear the building of observers, pulling out previously obscured boxes of ballots, running the same ballots repeatedly, and self reporting of a 90+% adjudication rate.
          Is that how you did it in Madison, Wisconsin too?

          1. In Madison absentee ballots are processed, counted at the polling sites in the same manner as other ballots, and reported with all other ballots. All of it is open and transparent.

            By the way you can’t rerun ballots because once they are accepted by the tabulator they are secured within the tabulator’s cabinet, under lock.

            1. All of it is open and transparent.

              Completely, because in Madison, they keep those nasty rethuglicans OUT.

              1. Not sure what you are talking about. Any polling site I worked had observers.

    3. “where there was real election interference and we have evidence of this interference. ”

      There was no significant interference, if any. And you have no evidence that you didn’t pull out of your ass.

      Just stop with the insane bullshit. Trump lost. Deal with it and move on.

      1. We have the tape of the former President soliciting election fraud and requesting that Georgia S of S find ballots for him.

  17. If and when this makes it to the Supreme Court for consideration, I bet the Court refuses to hear the case if Georgia’s laws are upheld.

    The Court has been reluctant to change the way votes are counted in the past–going back to before Bush Jr. beating Gore in Florida, but that’s a great place to start.

    As I understand it, in Bush vs. Gore, even when they decided that the equal protection clause was being violated in a county by county recount (with different counties by different standards), they deferred to the remedy as prescribed in Florida state law–rather than impose a statewide recount to ensure equal protection.

    If the judges on the Georgia supreme court, eight of which were appointed by Republicans, decide that the new law is constitutional, bet on the U.S. Supreme Court to stand by that.

    1. The US DOJ does not “take their chances” with judges in political cases like this any more. This will be going to handpicked judges.

      They do not have any claims of race based descrimination. This therefore should not survive a motion to dismiss. I predict a series of wins for the DOJ until they reach the US supreme court.

  18. Things you won’t see in the MSM, or Reason Magazine.

    Turns out there was an elections auditor who was supposed to observe the Fulton County elections and file a report on what he saw – which he did. And then they sat on the report for months as they proclaimed the election the cleanest ever. Know what the report said? The guy didn’t actually see any cheating, but he saw tons of opportunities for cheating as they ignored all the rules for election integrity – ballots coming in on open trays instead of locked boxes, elections materials not being tracked, no chain of custody on ballots, ballots being “found” at the last minute – plus he has a time-stamped picture of the counters continuing to count with no observers around after they announced they were done counting for the night and sent the press and the observers home. (Although that mistake doesn’t appear malicious – it appears the local election supervisor took it upon herself to call it a night and when the higher ups got wind of this they screamed at her to get her ass back to work, that other precincts were counting all night long and so should Fulton County. Rather than point out she had sent all the observers home and therefore couldn’t continue the count, the chastened supervisor did as she was told and continued the count.) Plus broken machines, not enough machines, elections officials who couldn’t do basic math, temp workers who came from who knows where, massive confusion like nobody here had ever seen an election before and just threw together a last-minute clusterfuck.

    But, yeah, the elections auditor didn’t actually see any fraud, just massive opportunities for fraud that would be laughable in a middle school student council election.

  19. Georgia’s new voting laws are about the same as Canada and most of Europe. Didn’t know those countries were racist.

    1. Canada is mostly just racist when it comes to indigenous people. Europe mostly Jews. East Europeans tend to be more racist than others.

      As I mentioned below the charge is not racism it is racial discrimination. It would be something like saying that the city, in building a new highway put in less exits leading to predominantly black neighborhoods than white ones.

  20. Look, if we’re going to allow mail-in voting with limited ID checking and ballot bundling, I’m going to get together a group to comb through voting records and find unregistered voters and offer to pay them to register and apply for mail-in ballots. Once they get the mail-in ballot, they have to fill out their ballots in front of me in the “correct” way so I can see how they voted before they get paid, of course. Now, I’m pretty sure you’re not supposed to pay people to vote a certain way, but who is going to know? How are they going to stop me from doing it?

    Oh, wait, I see one potential problem with this scheme – it’s going to cost more than I thought because I have to outbid the Democrats who are already doing this exact thing.

    1. Interesting scheme, but you could do the same thing at in person voting. The problem with buying votes is can you do enough to change an election? Second problem is that if you could buy enough votes you would not be able to keep it secret. Can 5K people keep a secret? I doubt it.

      1. That’s not true. If you vote in person nobody but you can see how you actually voted. So sure I can give you a bribe, but I won’t know if you voted per my wishes or not.

        1. IOWs, M4e is once again full of shit? How……
          expected.

        2. The question that still remains is can you buy enough votes to change and can you keep your activities a secret while buying enough votes? This problem exists if you buy votes in person or buy an absentee vote. Both activities are equally illegal.

          1. The question that still remains is can you buy enough votes to change and can you keep your activities a secret while buying enough votes?

            Why buy votes?

            Steven Crowder’s visits to addresses on mail in ballots was very revealing. Address after address was fake. Several were lots. Some were non-existent numbers.

            They’re not buying votes. They’re creating entirely fake ballots whose provenance they’ve made illegal to question.

            1. And you are saying the mailperson deliver mail to an empty lot? Where did he leave the mail? Absentee ballots have to be delivered to a specific location. In theory you could order up a ballot from a voter list, but you still have to figure out how to get that ballot.

        3. Not to mention that even if I pay you to vote a certain way, I can’t pay 100 or 1000 people to do so and then loiter around and wait to make sure everyone does.

          It’s almost like M4E’s never been to a polling place before.

          1. You could if you worked the site as an observer.

            The point here is that its easy to throw out an idea for fraud, much more difficult to near impossible to actually carry. To many variables that you would need to control for.

            1. The point here is that its easy to throw out an idea for fraud, much more difficult to near impossible to actually carry. To many variables that you would need to control for.

              God you’re dumb. Being an observer would allow you to loiter but not verify. Moreover, we’re discussing a specific kind of voter fraud in the context of rule changes that obviate all of them.

              I’d say you’ve thoroughly convinced me that you read with the mental ability of an autistic 6-yr.-old but an autistic 6-yr.-old wouldn’t have said “To many”.

              1. For all your name calling you have still not given a workable scheme for buying the votes needed and still doing it secretly. As I noted you can not buy 5000 people votes and not leave a very visible trail. There is no problem that requires changes to the law.

  21. People wonder why Merrick Garland never made it onto the SCOTUS.

    Wonder no longer…

    1. Yes. He did not make it because he is for democracy and the Rs could not allow that.

      1. Shut up you historically ignorant cunt, the US is a Constitutional Republic. Fucking retard repeating the “mUh DEmOcRacY!” line she hears the other retards shouting. FUCK YOU AND YOUR DEMOCRACY. If it were truly a “democracy” we would have lined you up against the wall already.

      2. Garland is not for democracy, he is very must an advocate for autocracy.

      3. MG posted since s/he:
        Is.
        Full.
        Of.
        Shit.

  22. following baseless and widespread claims, most notably from former President Donald Trump, that the 2020 election was stolen.
    I might have believed that up until the Time article detailing how the progressives “rescued” the election from the Trump voters.
    As I recall, the article promised followup installments with more details, which failed to appear. Do you think maybe someone called the publisher and said, “Ixnay on the aggingbray?”

  23. You forgot to say “without evidence”.

  24. You will note that he did not list one single thing that is in any way related to race.

    I will also make a bold prediction… They already have their judge and appeals court judges lined up.

    1. Yep

  25. The Democrats sure are squealing like pigs anytime election integrity bills get introduced to their ?perfectly legitimate win?…

    For such an honest election one would think there wouldn’t be anything to hide or push back on. After all; Lefty media says all ballots were completely legitimate so what’s all the fuss about.

  26. Georgia’s voting laws apply to all citizens regardless of race. That is not racist. However, assuming minorities are incapable of finding their polling station or acquiring an ID to vote, is racist. Of note is the fact that the long standing voter laws in Biden’s home state of Delaware (including more restrictive absentee ballot procedures, shorter voting windows, and absolute ID requirements) are much more onerous than those just passed in Georgia. Maybe the DOJ should sue Delaware first. As for claims of voter fraud being “baseless,” maybe the author should wait for the results of the Arizona audit before making such broad statements.

    1. They are going to argue that since black voters vote in larger numbers in the manners being restricted then it affects them in a disproportionate way.

      It is not racism they are talking about it is racial discrimination.

      It doesn’t sound very convincing but then again the reasons given by the state for changing the law do not either. We know why. It is voter gerrymandering.

      1. echo gerrymandering is why California is a one party state. dems have been in office in the last 3 census’ and have gerrymandered the crap out of Kalifornia. want fair elections BAN all gerrymander and devide each state into equal sqares ex: calis’ 58 districts by covering the state in 58 equal sized grid pattern.

        1. and ignore population density

          1. Right. Because Reynolds v. Sims can just be ignored or should be overturned. One person, one vote is BS, right?

  27. “baseless and widespread claims,”

    I am so sick of the knee-jerk insertion of the word “baseless” — an opinion being presented as if it were solid, undeniable fact — in front of anything Trump or his supporters said. Yes, Trump is not a reliable source. Yes, he and his supporters were not selective in their claims, grabbing indiscriminately at anything that looked off. But there was some wheat among the chaff, serious irregularities that should have been thoroughly investigated. Instead that word “baseless” is used to shut down any discussion of, any consideration of, and any investigation of the possibility of election fraud.

    1. Never seen more investigation of an election in my life. Or this much whining about it.

      So Guigliani goes to court on the Dominion suit next week. Right after having his law license yanked by New York. I saw that he has changed his defense. Now he is saying that all the crap he said was false but he didn’t know it at the time.

      Should be interesting. Sydney even more. She is just batshit crazy.

      1. Your life needs to soon end.

      2. Clintons and Obamas all had their law licenses yanked and they still got elected twice

    2. Baseless means no evidence. We don’t convict people for crimes, or overturn elections, on claims. You need evidence and you have none.

      The only people who have been caught trying to vote twice are Trump voters convinced they were being patriotic.

  28. Voting is for suckers.

    1. Your position is for idiots.

  29. “Justice Department Sues Georgia Over New Voting Restrictions, Claiming Discriminatory Intent”

    I assume they’re going to have to prove that claim to interfere in states regulating elections, right?
    BTW, seems to me that voting *should* be more difficult than driving by someplace and chucking an empty soda can out the window.
    Is it racist to ask if you’ve read the proposed laws and the positions of the candidates?

    1. I read the complaint and it’s garbage. It starts off with a boatload of stats and numbers about demographics, and when it gets to the discrimination part, it uses words like “disproportipnately” and “less/more likely,” with no substantiating numbers that illustrate discriminatory effect, outside of making black voters look stupid and helpless.

      Literally everything in the complaint is county level stuff that demonstrates mismanagement at that level, and not a massive republican conspiracy to keep black people from voting.

  30. The writer is a complete joke “baseless claims”LOL

    The very case justice makes to allegedly “prove” discrimination, disparate outcomes is all of a sudden baseless when applied to elections

    Now disparate outcomes are a symptom of possible discrimination and also are symptom of possible election fraud.

    You have to do a deeper investigation to determine the cause of the disparate outcome

    So tell me again how voter ID is racist?

  31. Wouldn’t the best response to this lawsuit be the most honest one? “We don’t see color your honor. We just wanted to limit Dem votes, and if they’re black, white, or green, we couldn’t care less.”

  32. “and that every voter has access to accurate information.”

    I wonder who determines what is “accurate”?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.