Why Fraudulent Elections May Be The New Norm

Are honest and open elections a thing of the past? If you believe that only United States citizens are qualified to vote in an election, then the answer appears to be yes. This article addresses the factors that have aligned to change the voter base to align with the liberl, progressive, socialist agendas. Read with conccern for our nation.

voting booth

By Thomas Lifson at American Thinker:

Coalition of Justice Dept. radical lawyers and tax-exempt nonprofits seeking to make it easy for non-citizens to vote.

The National Voter Registration Act, aka Motor Voter, aka auto fraudo, ostensibly was set up to ensure that people would be able to vote without much effort at all.  It has now been hijacked to enable noncitizens to register and vote.

As part of that act, an independent commission, the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), was set up, with two members each nominated by leaders of the two major parties in order to help states comply with the law, despite the fact that the 17th Amendment of the Constitution explicitly lays out that the states have the power to set the “[q]ualification requisite for electors.”  In this murky situation, opportunities for mischief are created.

Writing at National Review, Hans von Spakovsky explains what has developed:

… when Arizona sought to include citizenship-verification requirements with voter-registration forms, the institutional Left — including the League of Women Voters, People for the American Way, Common Cause, Project Vote, and Chicanos for La Causa — brought a lawsuit claiming that the EAC hadn’t approved such requirements. Incredibly, this fight over whether states can ensure that only citizens are voting went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. In 2013 in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, a divided Court said that Arizona could not implement such a requirement unless and until the EAC agreed to change the instructions for use of the federal form to include the Arizona requirements.

However,  the majority opinion in that case, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, stipulated that if the EAC refused Arizona’s request to accommodate the proof-of-citizenship requirement, the state could sue the EAC and establish in court that “a mere oath will not suffice to effectuate its citizenship requirement and that the EAC is therefore under a nondiscretionary duty to include Arizona’s concrete evidence requirement on the Federal Form.” The Court went so far as to say that Arizona could also claim that a refusal by the EAC would be “arbitrary,” since the agency “has accepted a similar instruction requested by Louisiana.” Indeed, the Court noted, the EAC had ”recently approved a state-specific instruction for Louisiana requiring applicants who lack a Louisiana driver’s license, ID card, or Social Security number to attach additional documentation” to the federal voter-registration form.

Arizona asked, and a single bureaucrat at the EAC named Alice Miller, who was not an EAC commissioner, but only the acting executive director, denied the request. It’s not even clear that Miller had the right to make this — or any other — decision.  At the time, a quorum did not exist on the bipartisan, four-member independent commission.

CONTINUE READING ARTICLE HERE

Leave a Comment

Comment via Facebook

Comment via Disqus