Do not settle for an email blasting service or a newswire overloaded with financial statements. Standard Newswire gets your news into the hands of working journalists, broadcast hosts, and news producers.
Find out how you can start using Standard Newswire to
Sign Up to Receive Press Releases:
Standard Newswire™ LLC
209 W. 29th Street, Suite 6202
New York, NY 10001, USA.
(212) 290-1585
Amicus brief argues attacks on election integrity law will "discourage citizen participation" in elections
Contact: Jill Farrell, Judicial Watch, 202-646-5188
WASHINGTON, Feb. 5, 2015 /Standard Newswire/ -- Judicial Watch announced today that it joined with the Allied Educational Foundation (AEF) to file an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court of the United States in opposition to a lower court ruling preventing North Carolina's implementation of its election integrity reform law. Judicial Watch and AEF argue that a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit incorrectly placed "disproportionate impact" racial theory at the center of its analysis of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). The brief was filed with the assistance of Chris Coates.
The Obama Justice Department (DOJ), working with allied advocacy groups, is challenging North Carolina's election integrity reforms that require voter ID, reduce early voting days, eliminate same-day voter registration, and require voters to vote where they are registered. The Obama Justice Department and allied advocacy groups have targeted voter ID and other election integrity laws, alleging, with no evidence, that the popular laws disparately and adversely affects minority voting rights.
Under the racial "disparate impact" theory, which is at the heart of the controversial Fourth Circuit opinion, a defendant can be held liable for discrimination for a policy that statistically disadvantages a minority group, even if that negative impact was neither foreseen nor intended. The more broadly accepted view by courts under Section 2 of the VRA says that a violation occurs only when voting practices are motivated by a discriminatory intent and that any incidental racially disparate impact of a voting law is not sufficient on its own to prove a violation of Section 2.
The JW/AEF brief also makes the point that the plaintiffs challenging the North Carolina law (with the support of the Justice Department) are reinterpreting federal voting rights law to subject every state in the Union to legal challenges, including enforcement actions from the DOJ, for virtually any change to their election laws:
[T]he Fourth Circuit's ruling, if allowed to stand, will undermine voter confidence in the integrity of elections, enshrine a new race-based standard in Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, and guarantee, as a practical matter, that no state will make changes to its electoral laws, whether to ensure electoral integrity or for any other reason, if those changes will in some way disproportionately affect minority voters. As this Court has explained, public confidence in the integrity of elections encourages citizen participation in the democratic process… Conversely, a lack of faith in electoral integrity undermines confidence in the system and discourages citizen participation in democracy.
