“If a Republican wins the Presidency, he or she would be well advised to listen to General Mukasey and implement fundamental changes to the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, particularly the Voting Section. Step One may well be remedial training on what the Rule of Law means. “
I will be speaking at the University of Virginia law school on September 16 at 11:45 a.m. The University of Virginia Federalist Society is sponsoring the event. It will take place in Room 101 at Withers-Brown Hall in the law school. The topic is “Injustice: Federal Civil Rights Enforcement and the Death of Post Racial America.”
Details are here. Sponsored by the Federalist Society at Campbell Law School.
“Right now, we’re in the middle of a purge,” said Greg Woolard, Franklin County’s clerk and chief elections official. “I just took office in December. I don’t think there had been one previously for a few years.”
Noted. Link here.
“The recently concluded federal trial over North Carolina’s election rules proved one thing beyond a reasonable doubt: The Obama administration and its partisan, big-money, racial-interest-group allies will stop at nothing to win elections. And using the courts to change election rules is a key part of their strategy.”
My latest with Hans von Spakovsky at National Review.
The press release.
“If advocates want the Voting Rights Act to remain popular among all Americans, they better start supporting using the Voting Rights Act to protect all Americans, not just some.”
The 5th Circuit has affirmed the district court’s findings that Texas Voter ID violated federal law. A couple of quick initial thoughts reading the opinion:
1. The ruling deals a blow to the Justice Department’s theories on intent. The opinion says that there must be the specific intention to discriminate, not just that discrimination might occur. This is a serious blow to those who would offer a legal theory that shows intent everywhere.
2. Shelby is cited for the idea that discrimination must be contemporaneous. So much for the DOJ-fueled experts who reflexively talk about reconstruction.
3. This won’t sit well with the plaintiff’s braintrust: “In turn, the relevance of this evidence rests upon the unsupported premise that a legislator concerned about border security or opposed to the entry into Texas of undocumented immigrants is also necessarily in favor of suppressing voting by American citizens of color.”
4. There is now a wider circuit split on what Section 2 results test would look like.
5. That the opinion was written by a George W. appointee only demonstrates further the “strength” of the trial defense.
6. Texas could have fixed this law in January but didn’t? Why not? There was a prevailing narrative pushed by some interests that the Fifth Circuit would reverse and uphold the law. That didn’t happen.
“The Justice Department has the authority to enforce the requirement. But with this “Justice” Department, some issues of justice are created more equal than others. . . . But never mind enforcing the voter laws we have on the books and making sure that American elections operate without corrupt rolls. For the Justice Department, it’s far more important to police elections for hosting the World Cup.”