SCOTUS 'Blocks' GOP Effort to Block Undesirables from Voting

Then, hurdles and labyrinths are constructed to confuse 41,000 registered voters in Arizona.

Courtesy of Inc

How many times have you ripped through books, files, and drawers looking for something that you were “positive was just right here the other day.” Having recently left a life filled with 30 years of the things that stick to life, the important, not-so-important, and the sentimental, most of the documents deemed necessary for proving my existence on this earth needed to be replaced. 

Thanks to COVID backlogs, many of those documents couldn’t be replaced quickly, let alone online. In other words, traveling to New Jersey from my new country of residence was necessary, and there I was told to “take a number.” We tried for three months to get my son a social security number but were unsuccessful. Thanks to Trump’s chaos, COVID, and so much more, a lot of the documents needed to prove citizenship are not easily attainable. They are attainable, of course, and this is why the Supreme Court’s alleged rejection of the Republican attempt to block 41,000 voters from voting in November is farcical. The right-wing, fascist majority can look us in the eyes and say honestly, “We didn’t block the right to vote.” 

41,000 Native-American citizens, students, and citizens in the military in Arizona, however, now must show a government-approved document that confirms they are indeed citizens. 

The Supreme Court cleared the way Thursday for a provision of Arizona law that requires proof of citizenship to register to vote in some circumstances, the first time the high court has weighed in on a voting dispute in the run-up to the presidential election (Arizona May Require Proof of Citizenship).

Wait. What? “Honey, where is my birth certificate?” I can’t vote without it. The Supreme Court says so.

But you can still vote — I think. 

The order means Arizona election officials must reject state registration forms if voters don’t provide documentation of citizenship. However, the justices kept on hold provisions of the law that could have disqualified voters who register with separate federal forms from casting ballots in a presidential contest in person or by mail.

In other words, Arizona voters can still register using a federal form, without proof of citizenship, and vote in the presidential contest (Arizona May Require Proof of Citizenship).

Note the use of “in other words” by the Washington Post. When a major newspaper uses such a bridge to clarify what it just wrote in the previous paragraph, it openly admits that it, too, is confused. I’m confused, and maybe you are, too. If you are here reading this, then like me, you find all things politics interesting — you are a junkie. Most Americans are not political junkies, and I am willing to bet that the Native Americans, college students gearing up for the start of a new semester, and soldiers stationed not in Arizona are not paying as much attention to the wording of the SCOTUS emergency order as we are.

It is shameful that voting in the “greatest democracy” has become more challenging to do than it is in modern-day Russia. It is even more disgraceful that no Republicans find any of this objectionable. All of us know precisely what Trump and his Brownshirts are doing. By inflating a problem that doesn’t exist, in this case, it is non-citizens voting, they have “convinced” the Christo-fascist right-wing of SCOTUS — the vile majority — that the problem must be remedied. 

While pretending to be impartial and not accepting the Republican effort to prevent people from voting altogether, SCOTUS took a page out of Putin’s Russia playbook. Create bureaucratic hurdles and labyrinths to wear down and exhaust people. Some of the 41,000 citizens in question will leap the hurdles and tear through the topiary, but many will be so discouraged they won’t even make the effort to vote.

The 5–4 order came after emergency appeal filed by state and national Republicans. It sought to give full effect to voting measures that were enacted after President Joe Biden won the state over Republican Donald Trump with less than 11,000 votes. The measures have drawn fierce opposition from voting rights advocates.

The case could be one of multiple election disputes to come before the high court with the November election less than 90 days away (SCOTUS Rejects GOP Push to Block Voters).

The race for the presidency in Arizona is very tight. It could go either way. 27 percent of the 41,000 voters now forced to don track shoes to prove they can still sprint are registered Democrats. 51 percent are independents. By stirring things up, SCOTUS, in cahoots with the Trump team, has muddied the puddle, making it less clear just how deep it is — can I step in it or not?

Wendy R. Weiser of the Brennan Center for Justice’s democracy program said the change in registration requirements three months before the election will result in a scramble for voters, election officials and voting rights groups.

“There needs to be a massive education effort for people who do not have documentary proof of citizenship for them to understand the correct way to register to vote if they want to be able to vote in the federal elections,” Weiser said. “There’s a real risk of confusion when there are two different voter registration forms (Arizona May Require Proof of Citizenship).”

Getting out the vote is difficult enough each election cycle. Millions of dollars and thousands of hours are invested in getting people registered. Information, clarity, and not obfuscation are the enemies of tyrants. By throwing the latest wrench in the works just 90 days before the election in a state that could decide the fate of our democracy, SCOTUS and the Trump team are wisely investing in their insurance plan:

Suppose we knock enough of the “federal only (people who only vote during presidential elections)” voters out of the picture. In that case, we can push our losing platform through and end all of this democratic nonsense once and for all.

One of the first things President Harris must do is take SCOTUS to the woodshed for an old-school tanning.