Tag: review

Supreme Court will review Arizona ballot-harvesting law

The U.S. Supreme Court said Friday it would review a 2016 Arizona law that prohibits anyone but a family member or caregiver from returning another person’s early ballot.

SCHUMER CALLS SUPREME COURT HEARING ‘IRRESPONSIBLE AND DANGEROUS’ AFTER SENATORS TEST POSITIVE FOR CORONAVIRUS

In January, a federal appeals court ruled that Arizona’s law banning so-called “ballot harvesting” violates the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution. Any further action has been stayed until the Supreme Court weighs in on the matter. Its new term begins next week.

The appeals court also found that Arizona’s policy of discarding ballots if a voter went to the wrong precinct violates the law, arguing both measures have a discriminatory impact on minority voters.

(AP Photo/Gerry Broome, File)

(AP Photo/Gerry Broome, File)

The harvesting case began with Democrats suing over a law passed by Arizona Republicans that made it a felony to return someone else’s ballot to election officials in most cases.

Both parties had used ballot collection to boost turnout during elections by canvassing – asking voters if they had completed their mail-in ballots.

Democrats, who found success in minority communities, said Republicans introduced the measure because of their accomplishments, while Republicans said the law was aimed at preventing election fraud. It remains in effect until the Supreme Court rules.

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, wrote in a statement that he is pleased the high court will hear the case.

The eight justices will not be returning to the courtroom to hear arguments in person due to the coronavirus pandemic but will participate over the telephone.

In recent years, the Supreme Court – closed to the public since March – has weakened the Voting Rights Act, the Associated Press reported. In 2013, the justices invalidated a key part of the law, allowing nine states to change their election laws without federal approval.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP

“Our country has changed,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. “While any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions.”

Source Article

Continue reading

Supreme Court to Review Arizona ‘Ballot Harvesting’ Law | Arizona News

By JESSICA GRESKO and MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Friday it will review a 2016 Arizona law that bars anyone but a family member or caregiver from returning another person’s early ballot. The law itself, however, remains in effect through the presidential election and until the justices rule.

The court will begin hearing arguments again next week after a summer break. The Arizona case was one of four cases the court, now eight justices because of the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, agreed to hear in its new term that begins Monday. As is usual, the justices did not comment in taking the cases. Because of the coronavirus pandemic, the justices will not be returning to the courtroom to hear arguments but instead will continue hearing arguments by telephone. The court has been closed to the public since March.

In the Arizona case, a federal appeals court ruled in January that Arizona’s law banning so-called “ballot harvesting” violates the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution, but the court put its ruling on hold while the Supreme Court was asked to take the case.

The appeals court also found that Arizona’s policy of discarding ballots if a voter went to the wrong precinct violates the law. The court said both have a discriminatory impact on minority voters in violation of the Voting Rights Act.

The high court in recent years has weakened the Voting Rights Act, throwing out the most powerful part of the landmark law in 2013. It could use the current case to go even further.

The case began after Republicans in Arizona passed the law making it a felony to return someone else’s ballot to election officials in most cases and Democrats sued.

Both parties had used ballot collection in Arizona to boost turnout during elections by going door to door and asking voters if they have completed their mail-in ballot. Democrats used the method aggressively in minority communities and argued their success prompted the new GOP-sponsored law. Republicans argued the law was aimed at preventing election fraud.

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, said in a statement he is pleased the court will hear the case.

The justices also said Friday they will review a longstanding effort by the Federal Communications Commission to relax restrictions in individual media markets on ownership of different forms of media — TV stations and newspapers — over fears that it would leave fewer outlets controlled by minorities.

The court also will take up cases involving how immigration officials evaluate the claims of asylum seekers and a lawsuit by the city of Baltimore against BP Inc. and other energy companies seeking money for their contribution to climate change, although the issue before the justices is a technical one involving where the case should be heard.

The Supreme Court has already filled its argument calendar through December, so none of the cases will be argued before January 2021.

Copyright 2020 The Associated Press. All rights

Continue reading

Supreme Court to review Arizona ‘ballot harvesting’ law | National politics

The high court in recent years has weakened the Voting Rights Act, throwing out the most powerful part of the landmark law in 2013. It could use the current case to go even further.

The case began after Republicans in Arizona passed the law making it a felony to return someone else’s ballot to election officials in most cases and Democrats sued.

Both parties had used ballot collection in Arizona to boost turnout during elections by going door to door and asking voters if they have completed their mail-in ballot. Democrats used the method aggressively in minority communities and argued their success prompted the new GOP-sponsored law. Republicans argued the law was aimed at preventing election fraud.

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, said in a statement he is pleased the court will hear the case.

The justices also said Friday they will review a longstanding effort by the Federal Communications Commission to relax restrictions in individual media markets on ownership of different forms of media — TV stations and newspapers — over fears that it would leave fewer outlets controlled by minorities.

The court also will take up cases involving how immigration officials evaluate the claims of asylum seekers and a lawsuit by the city of Baltimore against BP Inc. and other energy companies seeking money for their contribution to climate change, although the issue before the justices is a technical one involving where the case should be heard.

Source Article

Continue reading

Supreme Court to review Arizona ‘ballot harvesting’ law

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court said Friday it will review a 2016 Arizona law that bars anyone but a family member or caregiver from returning another person’s early ballot. The law itself, however, remains in effect through the presidential election and until the justices rule.

A federal appeals court ruled in January that Arizona’s law banning so-called “ballot harvesting” violates the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution, but the court put its ruling on hold while the Supreme Court was asked to take the case.

The appeals court also found that Arizona’s policy of discarding ballots if a voter went to the wrong precinct violates the law. The court said both have a discriminatory impact on minority voters in violation of the Voting Rights Act.

The high court in recent years has weakened the Voting Rights Act, throwing out the most powerful part of the landmark law in 2013. It could use the current case to go even further.

The current case began when Democrats filed a lawsuit shortly after Republicans in Arizona passed the law making it a felony to return someone else’s ballot to election officials in most cases. Republicans argued the law was aimed at preventing election fraud.

The Supreme Court has already filled its argument calendar through November’s election, so the case won’t be heard until after that.

rn{% endblock %}"},"start":"https://users.startribune.com/placement/1/environment/3/limit-signup-optimizely/start"},{"id":"limit-signup","count":12,"action":"ignore","mute":true,"action_config":{"template":"{% extends "grid" %}rnrn{% block heading_text %}Youu2019ve read your 10 free articles for this 30 day period. Sign up now for local coverage you wonu2019t find anywhere else, special sections and your favorite columnists. StarTribune puts Minnesota and the world right at your fingertips. {% endblock %}rnrn{% block last %}rn{{ parent() }}rn{# limit Krux pixel from https://www.squishlist.com/strib/customshop/328/ #}rnrn

Continue reading