Awani Review

Complete News World

US Supreme Court Approves Arizona's Restrictive Election Laws

US Supreme Court Approves Arizona’s Restrictive Election Laws

Democratic President Joe Biden said to himself deeply disappointed With this ruling, according to which drilling The Symbolic Right to Vote Act, adopted in 1965 as part of the struggle for civil rights.

The Republican Party, on the contrary, welcomed A landslide victory for the integrity of the elections.

The Court’s six conservative justices have already justified their decision on the need to combat electoral fraud. The three fellow progressives have distanced themselves, also denouncing judgment tragic Who is the abyss The Voting Rights Law 1965.

This landmark text aims to put an end to laws that, for years, kept black voters away from the polls in the southern United States, under the pretext of literacy or general knowledge tests.

Already in 2013, the Supreme Court invalidated the first part of a provision requiring former apartheid states to obtain the green light from the federal government before adopting any new electoral regulations.

Thursday addressed the second part of the law, which prohibits the adoption of any rule that has the effect of restricting access to voting by a minority group, even if the distinction is not written in black and white, or intentional.

Concretely, the Supreme Court has ratified two electoral laws with a limited scope, which were adopted by the Republican majority in Arizona.

One prohibits giving the early ballot to a third party to be deposited at a polling station if it is not a close family member. The other excludes ballot papers deposited in an office different from the office in which the voter is registered.

See also  Under pressure, Biden has imposed sanctions on Cuba and is threatening to go even further

Progressive judges disagree

Arizona laws are already creating a file The disparity in the participation rate, especially in Aboriginal communities, the Supreme Court recognized.

But just because there is a gap does not always mean that the system is not open.Conservative Justice Samuel Alito wrote on behalf of the majority.

Strong and fully legitimate interest ofThe state is fraud preventionHe continued, believing that this was justified the burden imposed on voters.

The Court’s three progressive justices strongly expressed their disapproval.

It is tragic that the court once again weakens a law that is a monument in America [qui] He protects her from her low instincts.

Quote from:Elena Kagan, Supreme Court Justice of the United States

The political stakes are strong: in the United States, minorities vote primarily for the Democratic Party. During the presidential election, black voter mobilization played a large role in Joe Biden’s favour.

For outgoing President Donald Trump, the election was fake, in particular due to the extensive use of advance opinion polls. Although no evidence has been presented to support his accusations, Republican elected officials from several states since January have tightened their electoral laws in the name of fighting fraud.

For Democrats, the new restrictions are making it harder for minorities to reach the polls. They have taken legal action to invalidate these laws, and the Ministry of Justice itself has referred the matter to the courts. Against text from Georgia.

Today’s Supreme Court decision complicates the chances of success of these appeals.

This makes it necessary to fight for adoption in Congress Of a law protecting the right to vote, Joe Biden announced, while Republican senators just blocked the passage of a text in that direction.

See also  Otis crowned the largest bear in Katmai Park, Alaska

Democracy is at stakeHe said again, disapproving An assault on civil rights.