Republican voter suppression tactics

GK Butterfield blasts Donald Trump's nominee for Federal judgeship

Thomas Farr is the last person who should be donning that robe:

“I’m disappointed that President Trump nominated a lawyer who has been at the forefront of defending the North Carolina Republican legislature as it has repeatedly engaged in political gerrymandering of state legislative and congressional district boundaries and has passed regressive voting laws that had the intended effect of diluting the voting rights of minority groups,” Butterfield said.

“I urge the United States Senate to carefully scrutinize the record of Thomas Farr and determine if he can impartially serve as a judge in cases involving voting and civil rights,” Butterfield said.

This development, on top of the Republicans' sustained refusal to approve African-American judicial appointees, sends a clear message the GOP is intent upon suppressing the rights of NC's minority populations in whatever way it can. It's unconscionable and unforgivable, and it needs to be a core campaign issue in both 2018 and in Thom Tillis' re-election bid in 2020. If we don't push back harder, Republicans will continue to stifle the voices of those who are already widely ignored by the majority of NC's citizens.

Next NC GOP voter suppression tactic: Referendum on Voter ID

Harking back to the Amendment One debacle:

“We believe the public support for voter ID is sufficient, that clarifying it in the North Carolina Constitution as a requirement is something the people would support,” Lewis said. “So I think that to mute future court challenges, you could certainly see that.” Some experts believe a voter ID requirement passed by the people could have a firmer footing in court.

“The primary objective to try to avoid a finding of discriminatory intent by saying ‘Hey we put the thing before voters and they approved it.’ Which would put on anyone challenging the law the formidable burden of showing the people of North Carolina acted with discriminatory intent, at least if they want to act on a constitutional claim,” explained Tokaji, who said other types of legal challenges would be possible.

In reality, the "discriminatory intent" could be nothing more than a majority of voters realizing they had a valid ID right there in their wallet or purse, and casting their vote to pat themselves on the back for being prepared. Voter ID has never been about suppressing the majority, it's about suppressing that 10% or so (and roughly 25% of African Americans) that would likely vote against Republicans. Minority rights should never be put before a popular vote, especially when you're deciding voting rights. Sheesh, it ain't rocket science, it's a basic American principle.

The NC GOP's intentional deception exposed by Supreme Court

Getting your lies tangled up will eventually bite you in the ass:

The State’s contrary story—that politics alone drove decisionmaking—came into the trial mostly through Hofeller’s testimony. Hofeller explained that Rucho and Lewis instructed him, first and
foremost, to make the map as a whole “more favorable to Republican candidates.”

The District Court, however, disbelieved Hofeller’s asserted indifference to the new district’s racial composition. The court recalled Hofeller’s contrary deposition testimony—his statement (repeated in only slightly different words in his expert report) that Rucho and Lewis “decided” to shift African-American voters into District 12 “in order to” ensure preclearance under §5. See 159 F. Supp. 3d, at 619–620; App. 558. And the court explained that even at trial, Hofeller had given testimony that undermined his “blame it on politics” claim.

Before you ask, I don't know. I've only read part of this decision, which upholds the lower court decision, so it appears the maps will need to be redrawn. Or the already re-drawn maps will now be used. Better minds than mine (easily found) need to be mined for an assessment. I'll try to follow-up with more info, but just to be clear: This decision only affects Congressional Districts, not Legislative. Districts 1 and 12, to be exact, but that also means surrounding Districts will be changed as well. Progress.

Kakistocracy: NC GOP chooses man who sued Elections Board to sit on Elections Board

Civitas' Francis De Luca is the last name that should have come up:

Republicans’ latest attempt to overhaul the state’s elections and ethics board is still awaiting Gov. Roy Cooper’s veto stamp, but the N.C. Republican Party is already nominating members for the new board. Once Cooper vetoes the bill, the House and Senate are expected to override the veto and pass the bill into law. Based on the initial votes on April 11, it appears Republicans have the three-fifths majority needed for a successful override.

That likelihood appears to have prompted N.C. Republican Party chairman Robin Hayes to announce his picks on Thursday. He proposed a list of six candidates, and if the bill becomes law – and isn’t put on hold by courts – Cooper would pick four. Here’s who Hayes picked: Francis De Luca of Cary, leader of the conservative Civitas Institute and a former Ethics Commission member. De Luca sued the State Board of Elections last year seeking to delay the counting of absentee ballots. Stacy “Four” Eggers IV of Boone, a former member of Watauga County Board of Elections.

Don't really care about the other four, because these two dudes take the proverbial cake. Four Eggers is notorious for suppressing the vote on the local level in Watauga County, but De Luca set his sights much higher, challenging the votes of thousands of his fellow citizens, and trying his best to get rid of a process on which countless voters rely, Same-Day Registration:

Voters fight back: Guilford GOP accuser sued for defamation

This isn't Salem in the 17th Century, and false accusations have consequences:

William Clark Porter IV, who is named as the defendant in the lawsuit, could not be reached for comment. Porter is committee chairman of the Guilford County Republican Party. He accused nine voters of casting ballots in another state, eight of voting with felony convictions and said one deceased person voted.

Karen Niehans, 74, and her husband Sam Niehans, plaintiffs in the lawsuit, were both accused of voting in two states. They moved to Jamestown in 2016 to be closer to family and both of the claims against them were found to be without merit. “This was personal,” Karen Niehans said. “My democratic right to vote was challenged. It’s as if someone was saying that I was less than others, that my voice shouldn’t count. That’s just plain wrong to do to someone and I am not going to take it. I want to make sure that this doesn’t happen to anyone else.”

I hope this dude gets raked over the legal coals, and I also hope there is some evidence uncovered of monetary compensation from state GOP officials for leveling these false allegations. So tired of their unethical behavior, and having to watch them get away with it, over and over again.

US Supreme Court puts freeze on 2017 Special Elections

But this Tweet from John Burns is muy importante:

Hopefully the Appeal will be heard and rejected with the quickness, and we can get about the business of fair elections.

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Republican voter suppression tactics