Merrick Garland’s flippant remarks about securing our nation’s vote for its citizens are both ignorant and infuriating at the same time. As record numbers of minority citizens successfully cast votes in every corner of the country, great care should be taken to reserve the right to vote for the citizen and not the usurper.
Does the history of the United States include the disenfranchisement of several demographics from their right to vote? Yes. Non-landowners, women, and Black Americans all had to fight elements of ignorance and elitist arrogance to rightfully attain their right to vote. But – and this cannot be stressed enough – those days of discrimination and disenfranchisement are long over and those still thumping the drum to claim they are not, defy the reported numbers and the reality in which we exist today.
As the following voter turnout data chart shows, in 1976 Black voter turnout stood at 48.7 percent, 10.5 percent below the national average. This rose to an all-time high of 62.0 percent in 2012, 4.4 percent above even the White demographic, and 5.5 percent above the national average.
Garland’s Gratuitous Gaslighting
In his remarks to a predominantly minority church in Selma, Alabama, Garland played an egregious political game with voting rights when he called efforts by several states to implement voter identification (voter ID) laws, “unnecessary” and “burdensome.” Garland failed to speak to how voter ID laws can actually thwart the legal casting of ballots.
Garland went on to say:
“There are many things that are open to debate in America…One thing that must not be open for debate is the right of all eligible citizens to vote and to have their vote counted…
“That is why we are challenging efforts by states and jurisdictions to implement discriminatory, burdensome, and unnecessary restrictions on access to the ballot, including those related to mail-in voting, the use of drop boxes, and voter ID requirements.”
The inanity and abdication of constitutional duty in his intent are stunning. That Garland chose to highlight two COVID pandemic-era relaxations of voting laws in creating unsecured drop boxes and expanded generalization of mail-in ballot use is telling. Even more so is his championing of those two open doors to voter fraud and his objection to verifying, without doubt, who is casting those ballots.
The US Constitution Says It’s A States Rights Thing
During the Constitutional Convention of 1787, the framers debated the structure of the new government, ultimately settling on a federal system that divided powers between the central government, leaving the lion’s share of authority to the states. This division of authority extended to elections, with the framers codifying considerable autonomy to the states in managing their electoral processes. This decision was rooted in a desire to safeguard states’ rights and ensure that diverse regional interests were represented in the national government.
The US Constitution grants states the authority to administer elections through a combination of explicit provisions and the 10th Amendment, which reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states. Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution explicitly states:
“The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof…”
This language empowers state legislatures to establish the rules and procedures governing federal elections within their jurisdictions. Over time, this authority has been reaffirmed and clarified through various legal interpretations, including landmark Supreme Court decisions such as Marbury v. Madison and, much more recently, Shelby County v. Holder.
The decentralized nature of the US electoral system serves several practical purposes. First, it allows states to tailor their election procedures to suit their unique demographics, cultures, and logistical challenges. For example, states with large rural populations may adopt different voting methods and polling place arrangements than more densely populated urban areas.
Additionally, decentralization mitigates the risks associated with centralized control, such as the potential for fraud or manipulation. By distributing authority across multiple jurisdictions, the electoral system becomes more resilient to external threats and less susceptible to systemic failures, although some would argue that the more nefarious elements of our political system have evolved voter fraud and ballot manipulation to an advanced art form.
Thank God He Isn’t On The US Supreme Court
The larger hypocritical juxtaposition here is that while Garland pays lip service to the “right of all eligible citizens to vote and to have their vote counted”, the very federal intervention into the sovereignty of the states where voting laws are concerned dilutes the rightful potency of a citizen’s vote by not assuring that only citizens are voting.
Further, his “centralized governmental” approach to federal elections flies in the face of the constitutional mandate that the states have purview over how they execute elections in their states. Using Garland’s approach, the federal government is committing an unconstitutional act of election interference.
(As an aside, this is why the movement to abolish the Electoral College is patently unconstitutional. It would unconstitutionally encroach on a state’s right to its legislature to prescribe the times, places, and manner of holding federal elections to include their right to apportion electors as their demographics mandate.)
But perhaps the most potent argument in favor of establishing voter ID laws in each of the 50 states and the several territories is the recent influx of non-citizens – or “newcomers” as the Biden White House is attempting to brand the illegals crossing our borders – into our country.
Hard-working or not, seeking a better life or just to grift off the bleeding heart social welfare giveaways, non-citizens should never – ever – have access to the ballot box. Not locally. Not statewide. And especially not federally. Yet Blue states are increasingly making it easier for non-citizens to vote:
Motor Voter Laws: Perhaps the most egregiously open door to registering non-citizens to vote comes in the “Motor Voter” law, formally known as the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 that exists across the country. “Each State motor vehicle driver’s license application (including any renewal application) submitted to a State motor vehicle authority must serve as a simultaneous voter registration application unless the applicant fails to sign the voter registration application. This application for voter registration must be considered as updating any previous voter registration by the applicant.” With many states making it easier for non-citizens to secure a driver’s license, these non-citizens are automatically provided an application to register to vote.
States Granting Voting Rights to Non-Citizens: As stated above, several states have enacted legislation allowing non-citizens to obtain driver's licenses. These states include California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, and Washington, along with the District of Columbia.
COVID Rules Relaxation: During the COVID pandemic, many states relaxed voting regulations to accommodate the perceived challenges posed by the public health “crisis”. One significant change was the expansion of mail-in voting options broadening eligibility criteria for absentee ballots, allowing voters to request them without needing to provide a specific reason. Additionally, many states implemented measures to streamline the process of requesting, receiving, and returning mail-in ballots, such as establishing drop-off locations, simplifying identification requirements, and extending deadlines. Furthermore, some states extended early voting periods and implemented post-election day voting.
What The Progressive Neofascists Say & The Truth
The commonly held criticism provided by the Progressive neofascists of the political Left is that voter ID laws suppress voter turnout by making it harder to attain the necessary identification and then through a process of attaining those pieces of identification that intimidates.
A bigger load of bovine feces has never been presented on the American political stage for consideration and the voter turnout data above proves this beyond doubt.
But what states dare to ask for voter ID and what are these Orwellian hoops that potential voters are faced with in attaining and providing voter ID at the polling place?
As of January 2024, 34 states in the United States have voter ID laws that require voters to present some form of identification at the polls on Election Day:
The following states require voters to present identification containing a photograph to verify that the person requesting a ballot is who he or she says they are: Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin.
In the following states, voters are requested to present photo identification, but there are alternative forms of identification accepted that will satisfy identity verification before the casting of a ballot. Valid photo ID includes a state-issued driver's license or photo ID card, a US passport or federal ID card, a tribal photo ID card, or a license to carry a concealed weapon: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Rhode Island, South Dakota, and Texas.
In the remaining 15 states and the District of Columbia, voters are not required to present identification at the polls on Election Day: California, District of Columbia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Wyoming.
So, the majority of states have voter ID laws on the books and Merrick Garland refuses to acknowledge that those laws are not “discriminatory, burdensome, [or establish] unnecessary restrictions on access to the ballot.” In fact, in Alabama, the state in which Garland made his unfounded statements, the Alabama Secretary of State has established mobile registrar’s offices that travel the state to ensure everyone has access to acquiring the necessary identification…and it costs nothing.
Please contrast this with the list of everyday things people – both citizens and not – must provide a photo ID for:
Boarding an Airplane: To travel by air, you must present a valid photo ID at the airport security checkpoint
Employment: Many employers require photo IDs for identification and security purposes
Opening a Bank Account: When setting up a bank account, a photo ID is typically necessary
Making Certain Purchases: Some transactions, especially those involving age-restricted items (like alcohol or cigarettes), require a photo ID
Access to Special Events: Concerts, conferences, and other events may ask for photo identification
Entering Bars or Casinos: Establishments that serve alcohol or allow gambling often require photo IDs
Membership Access: Gyms, clubs, and other membership-based places may ask for photo identification
Legal and Official Transactions: Submitting official paperwork, applying for government benefits, or dealing with legal matters often requires a photo ID
Driving: Your driver’s license serves as both a form of identification and a permit to operate a vehicle
But You First Need The Brain Cells
So, if it isn’t “discriminatory, burdensome, or unnecessary” to present a photo ID to receive a government check, purchase alcohol, or get on an airplane, why does Garland believe presenting a photo ID is so egregious when attempting to safeguard the most important right afforded to us under the US Constitution?
This answer is obvious to anyone with two brain cells to rub together.
Take Back Your Mind
Think For Yourself
In Chicago the democrats tell their voting base , Vote early and vote often. Now the democrats across the US are saying Vote early, vote often. The difference is they now have 11,000,000 new democratic voters to go and vote democrat. Chicago democrats never had it better since thousands of migrants are ready to go vote, early and often in the US election for president in November. 4 more years, 4 more years! Would you believe 4 more years of Joe Biden as president?