DOJ Sues Georgia Over Voting Law

SICU the Department of Justice choose Georgia over new voting law. What happens next line from Washington DC we are scrutinizing new laws that seek to curb voter access and that where we see violations of federal law. We will phone lines are open for your questions right now called 1-800-684-3110 keeping that promise the Department of Justice is suing the state of Georgia and now your host Jordan secular.

Second, we talked for this last with the Department of Justice, the Atty. Gen. announced this lawsuit against the state of Georgia. Specifically, the new voting law there. We told you we would analyze it and that we would discuss it on the broadcaster right to do that today on a secular would take your calls. Your comments as well.

What hundred 684-3110. If you would get on this conversation member there's another 14 states that follow Georgia and passing similar laws, not exact because of the Constitution that somehow it's not. There's not a universal way of a voter lot. But what you can do is compare and contrast aware, the Georgia law sits today and where other laws around the country. I stand as well. It's you can't compare to say okay what about in these deep blue states in the Northeast is whether there laws like well if you look at first it's in Georgia in person early voting. So that's when you basically can choose the site you want to go to anywhere the state is usually no restrictions on on location at all.

You just have to be set at the certain requirements that your registered voter and state basically and it goes for 17 days under the new law. George, 17 days of in person early voting. Only nine days in New Jersey or New York. So right there right off the top.

Georgia is has got what is good about double the amount of time to go vote before and to go vote early.

As well, and I think that's key to point out here that is one right off the top 17 days versus nine days. People talk about all these are the different provisions requiring voters to apply for mail ballots to have to give a driver's license. The NAACP has commenced that this would exacerbate existing racial disparities in absentee ballot rejections that provision on licensee's or state ID requirements to get a the absentee or apply for mail and ballot is identical to the same provision in Pennsylvania and Maryland. The lawsuit being filed by the part of justice against Maryland against Pennsylvania. By the way they were filed against New York and New Jersey singing that allow more early voting. It would be the federal government's job to tell the states. How many days you got have early voting without agile point will be except early voting is because of the door. That's pretty new technology that's actually, that would Georgia voting was at the door that you could just go pick any polling location for three weeks and there's a flood of questions about whether or not it's really right as voters can constantly mandate that because there's a question about whether you should even be voting three weeks before because so much can happen. There's a there's an argument I think a a valid argument that early voting, which I think is good, but early voting that was missing 90 days out as you just mentioned, it would be an entirely different set of facts and circumstances in the election at that point and inherited. There's nothing in the Constitution that requires early voting. Although Georgia has a very liberal early voting requirement is a voting day.

Absolutely I think as a predicate. We should note that a fundamental principle of Anglo-American law is that we are presumed innocent until we are found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Now, I recognize this is not a criminal law issue, but it's also important to recognize that Atty. Gen. Garland has simply reversed this presumption, he assumes that Georgia is guilty unless they can adduce evidence that they are indeed innocent.

Even though the Georgia law fully complies with the Constitution supposed retake your culture comments on this.

The idea get politicizing voting, dividing the country. A lot of these racial lines. I think part of the strategy here with this lawsuit specifically reported out about all these other states where Georgia has, it is more generous.

Re: filing lawsuits against them. Are they violating the rights of any rights there where is the line we talk about today. Secular challenges facing Americans is a time when our value or freedom sword constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice for decades now on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do more work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms than remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you. If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us. ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing become a member today ACLJ only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable in voice.

Is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn Gold mission like it will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activists ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the Obama care means to the prone life in many ways your membership in his empowering the right to question your free copy of mission in life today online/secular family on Facebook periscope YouTube as well.

Your comments in as you know the state of Georgia cities that states you like that the laws were very covert that they were Haphazardly applied that there were loopholes in the laws that were that allowed it for nonstate actors to gather ballots without ballot boxes and and so the states it okay we look at what happened this last election cycle. We are going to go to go back into our law. Some things up right exactly.

It's not it's not to say Raquel hourly voting which could have become a little bit clear about what you have to do for early voting. What you have to do the ballot drop boxes will be official state ballot dropbox that could be nonprofit groups and random people harvesting ballots and maybe your ballot gets to the right place and maybe doesn't not worry with the state is involved, so it's actually putting more bureaucracy in place, yes, but doesn't that make actual sense that if you have ballot box drop off points which again I constitutionally required state doesn't have to do that with both fallacy is Department of Justice lawsuit if you can have about drop off point and you said this and you and you and longtime Georgia that these were unmanned. They were was a ballot drop off point next to a newspaper stand its ground and explain yeah I I am a George and I live in Georgia I voting George lived in Georgia for 50 years.

It's my home state and one of the things alarm is going down one of the main thoroughfares in Atlanta.

Ponce De Leon Ave. I noticed a ballot box of for the dropping of absentee ballots running on a male and balance. It was simply unattended next to a newspaper stand. There was no surveillance person there. There was no law enforcement person. There was no one guarding it.

There was no one watching Inc. and all you had to do is go in and throw the ballot so that this law. I think that was passed by the legislature was called voter integrity act and that's what it's designed to do. But what's so disturbing to me and the challenge that is been raised here by order, justice is they treat minority citizens area as if they are literally second-class citizens in that you know the argument is actually made that allowing for requirement of the voter ID, which by the way, is required to store and send to Marilyn Pennsylvania and in Georgia. The voter ID could be an utility bill, but that requiring it and requiring a certain amount of days it is just disproportionately unfair. The minority communities as if they cannot follow the rules that I mean that to me that's the racial prejudice I think you're absolutely right, and it is a fundamentally racist idea.

The Justice Department claims the Georgia law is racist. Why simply because it changes the voting integrity rules in Georgia without the permission of elites in Washington instead of reviewing the Georgia law honestly and fairly and fairly. And instead of believing that African-American voters are just as competent as any other human being. Excuse me the DOJ prefers to believe that any change in the law is racist and that African-American voters are so fundamentally incompetent that they need the assistance of elites in Washington to figure it out. To get to the polls are to actually acquire sufficient voter ID items such as a licensed or some other form of identification. I think at the end of the day the approach that is taken by the DOJ harkens back to the history of the Democratic Party. Unfortunately with the Democratic Party specialized in voter suppression and so while I would oppose all forms of voter suppression, whether it's coming from Democrats or Republicans. It's important to keep in mind that the history of Georgia is a largely grounded if we go back far enough in Democrat party politics. They include individuals like Josephus Daniels, who was the secretary of the Navy in the Woodrow Wilson administration. He wasn't unreconstructed races. He was an individual who try to deprive African-American voters of the right to vote quite successfully in the state of North Carolina.

And guess who was his assistant secretary. None other than Franklin Delano Roosevelt so it's a very, very important to look at the history of the Democratic Party and not be confused with respect to the history of the present day Republican Party, but they jump out so that you have these target Georgia was big George's been at the forefront of so much. This politics because the Senate races there.

Stacy Abrams role the voting the way that I think the laws were taken advantage of and it was chaotic and so Georgia, so we don't want to have chaos every election cycle. We don't have people feel like they date the integrity of their vote doesn't matter showing up. Doesn't matter so we did make it clear where the rules of the game here really put it out your two years in advance so I think it is it so demeaning to a group of people say you put the rules they get couple years in advance. Saw the nonprofit groups know what the rules are. Instead of saying way we gotta undo these laws because this is too restrictive with this group can't handle this law or this rule it to me. That is just the whole the whole problem with that. If you look at these.

If you look at lot itself. That way rules itself. That way I get to be so again it's just suspect to treat a whole group of people as if this is this too difficult to follow the standard to be too difficult and is we've Artie walked through. There are more generous standards in the state of Georgia than that many states across the country that doesn't mean that New Jersey had an end, by the way, New York need to change how long I don't think they need to allow for longer necessarily early voting. I early voting is got out of control. To be honest with this only works in politics had been awash in deceit that we work towards election day. But that's not really how campaigns work anymore because you have to imagine that I have to vote may be in before you're even done putting out your final message to voters. No question about it Jordan, I mean I would first start by saying I think that what you're seeing now the process you describe the states take another look at how to run the mechanics of their elections. During this is how the framers intended. That's why they gave the authority to the state legislators. They wanted them to take a deliberate sort of long-term approach on how their elections would run and Jordan.

They didn't want every state to look the same and it wanted to be one-size-fits-all. So if you look at the contrast that you are laying out your to see more restrictive laws in some states may be less restrictive than others, but it's right in the mainstream of what you see across the country during that was by design what was not by design was what we saw in 2020, where there was a scramble. These changes were made in in a rush, they were not as deliberate and so now he states look to recalibrate a you see these threats coming from the federal government turn.

I would maybe inject one other thing that is conversation. I think it's a little bit interesting to note that this lawsuit from the DOJ comes in the wake of what it comes in the wake of a failed legislative effort to federalize election still to me when that effort failed. This is a second step essay with we can't get it all were still to get as much power in Washington DC through the DOJ as we can I say something on that link as having been raised a very important point that is you got understand something the administration is going to do everything they can to change the rules now. For instance, in the juke back in the Georgia situation. Georgia lost the All-Star game limited to Colorado because there were such an uproar over this bill that they moved to Colorado. Colorado voters have two days less then Georgia voters do for early voting. Georgia has two days more than the state. They moved it to Atlanta and most of the metropolitan city areas of Georgia are minority controlled governments, which is my that's the way it works.

Colorado has one of the lowest state populations area of minority citizens so the law was, but is better in Georgia for for early voting in Colorado city governments are controlled by minority in Georgia not in Colorado and this is that just again.

It's exactly what you said it's treating people as if you enjoyed both of this they can follow the rules absolutely, and this approach ultimately at the end of the day disproportionately harms African-Americans so the approach taken by leaders is grounded in nothing less then virtue signaling on anabolic steroids. In other words, they're basically trying to demonstrate to the rest of us how virtuous they are. But at the end of the day. They are engaged in policies that have a disproportionately adverse effect on African-American voters, African-American businesses and so at the end of the day.

I would conclude they don't really care about African-Americans, but they do care about one thing and one thing only political power and so at the end of the day.

This is a power grab by Washington. Basically to destroy or to over turn the wishes of the voters in the state of Georgia gave you look to the laws of New York, utilizing New Jersey look laws in Pennsylvania to go against states, which I DOJ you argued with Georgia is got laws that are again at some more generous is the best rates at right or wrong is more generous than other states. And yet you're still alleging only one.

A society can agree that the most vulnerable and is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life. We've created a free and powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn Gold edition like to show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ were fighting for the rights of pro-life activists ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later, planned parenthood's role in the what Obama care means to discover the many ways your membership is empowering the right question. Your free copy mission life today online ACLJ/challenges facing Americans as time went on our freedom sword constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice ACLJ on the front lines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in courts in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success.

But here's the bottom line we could not do more work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms and then remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member.

Thank you, are not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ God where you can learn more about her life changing become a member today ACLJ21 800-684-3110. Your comments on Facebook periscope as well.

This is all goes that's what you both use of these other examples because he got up a lot of this was the banning of water back with this first event of it was not true. It was not any water tested so no because people do not read the law and not others to the O law in New York. Again, there's a prohibition of providing meet, drink, tobacco, refreshment, other provision with a retail value more than a dollar so more the bottle water it's it's prohibited in New York within 100 feet of the interest is the polling places that is part of the New York law in Georgia. This does not stop the voting center so all of the different places you could put water septic essay allow for all that it it specifically allows that he specifically says this is how you should do it. This is a get his estate should be able to respond if they see it.

It with a group that looks like they're giving out a little bit too much so in case a little bit more than just water. It's a little bit more, but too much of an incentive to go vote.

That's the idea is you don't incentivize voting is the this the buying votes basically incur encouraging people.

The only reason you should do this because you getting XYZ that is not why you go vote in the United States America already cut to the last voting and in your constantly try to combat those bad influences writing that the alcohol ideas. It you can you can convince people to vote the way they you want because you will offer this kind of services offer this kind of you know food whenever Ed don't wait in line longer stay in line on right you don't do that and said you got a combat that we had a mess in our country. In 2020.

What it what you with that the elections people lost faith in our electoral system.

It doesn't matter if there if they were right or wrong in that thought they lost faith. You can't argue with that fact. People didn't trust the process so the states of God's word said we needed we need to make sure that at the end of the day whether your pert, your candidate won or lost you. You're not your focus is not that you lost the process that the process defeated your candidate or the person you wanted to win and so while this is an issue I think it is very real because people have got to do in the day at least trust the system like the outcome.

But if you if you don't like the system itself will raise a host of issues. Repeat 20/20 over and over and over again, let me ask all of you this company 20 2020 Abby 2020s you want to live through without the that states looking at their slots to how we prevent this so that people are now hosting rallies say the vote was rigged in the state of what was this was phony or this is fraud and who control this dropbox effect is a Georgia nonstate entities had drop boxes. There were harvesting ballots, but what rules applied to them if if they did, like where they were taken harvesting those ballots if they could. They look at okay what we know this is a public area was a Democrat there.

She's Abby who's who's in control, so Georgia, what they say were to put more of these boxes out, but there you have to have, you know, there could be official locates like libraries state state buildings localities that would not allow outside groups to run our election system so you look at some of the this situation like this. It is a question raised in the Georgia case that forcing election officials to wait until the Pope polls close to start counting votes in the again this is kind the allegation. This would allow people to so doubt over the outcome of the election will a lot of states. You don't pre-count.

In fact, Delaware Joe Biden's home state does not allow Andy, the pre-County elections out of the state wants a pre-count, that's fine too, but mandating it from the Department of Justice seems way over the top when the President's home state where he votes has a different position and it's the same in New York to J well I think of the whole thing is and nothing then mentioned it before, and then Mary adverted to it as well and that's the federalization of the election process they they failed to to get their law through the sentence other than the decide to do through litigation in the federal district courts. What they're trying to do is to arrogate and concentrated power in Washington DC and to tell us in the states how to vote. What the vote when the vote, how to vote when to put on machines when dissent out of our absentee ballots when not to send them out when you can mail in ballot when you can mail in ballad you know whether you can have a voting day. Maybe they're going to come up with eventually sank to the Department of Justice that you can have a voting day just going to be someone to serve all that's the problem that I see is the federalization of the process and the concentration of power in Washington take a phone call had tears coming from California online to a terra-cotta secular you're on the recall on record at school.

She wanted everyone to about including the legal will that situation. I'm black when I am, so that up with the right notion that we are too stupid to survive. We are so we just cannot think for ourselves. Is there any outreach to the African-American community to actual economic want is a lot of people I checked out and I get going on. I appreciate your call very much and let me tell you this. This will we reach a pretty large African-American audience and make stations all over the country and I would tell you this, the idea that illegals have the right to vote isn't versus unconstitutional but you raise the same point Prof. Hutchinson in raising and that the this approach in and of itself. Harry is racist, absolutely.

So I think it's very very important to actually look at the specifics of the law. So for instance if you compare the Georgia law to New York New Jersey to Pennsylvania. Guess what, and Delaware. Joe Biden's home state. It turns out Georgia makes it easier. Georgia provides more access. Georgia provides more rules with respect to allowing absentee voting in many of these states, yet the individuals in the blog is fear the social media accounts. They are simply claiming with out a shred of evidence that the Georgia law is indeed racist. The only way the Georgia law is racist is if African-Americans are deprived of their own agency their own ability to make their own decisions, their ability to read and at the end of the day what we should keep in mind is that the opponents of the Georgia law are posing the Georgia law, not on the basis of principal not on the basis of a specific provision they dislike, but simply because they think the Georgia law will make it easier and fairer for people to fully express their opinion at the end of the day, the Department of Justice believes that a fair voting scheme is only a skiing that favors the Democratic Party. This is precisely the presumption that the Democrats made 150 years ago. They attempted to control the outcome of elections successfully disallowed African-Americans from voting, and now they want African-Americans to vote, but so long as those African-Americans vote for one party and one party only in the second point, which I made previously is at the end of the day. The DOJ wants to control every single aspect of what goes on in each and every state in America.

The American people should not allow that to happen in the quick questions. This is now a very real issue is not a discussion about politics and what is now become a lawsuit by the federal government either by the administration by the Las Vegas state of Georgia to try to validate this new law and the new provisions which I think we've got to very clearly to say these new laws and new provisions again. When you look at the other states still were generous or generous very back decades, DOJ had been on the frontlines protecting your freedom is defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side.

If you're already a member thinking.

If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us, ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ live from Washington DC and secular. We are to 164 3110. As we told you last week happened on Friday, the partner Justice announces filing a lawsuit against state of Georgia because of their new the new voting requirements and rules really to update to existing law and these provisions which at first be that the political discussions of George's bad water at the polling place. Not that that's not the case.

I Georgia is that is is that this is targeted at to make more restrictive voting and you look at the log compared to other states much more generous and I use that word because I don't think the other states have to change the rule. The rules either.

They should all have to be at the standard of George Abby that the these states there in the South who have dealt with these histories before have actually gotten a bit under much more scrutiny used to be.

They could even pass the laws without first going through scrutiny at the federal level filings for court said no more that that doesn't stop the federal government though from filing this type of lawsuit so that is where we are today is do you want a repeat of 2020, where people don't trust the system don't understand the system, especially the early voting versus absentee voting at Neyland voting versus at the absentee voting is this specific ballot. Your request because there's a reason why you meet one of the reasons of the absentee ballot that you can't vote that day that used to be at the absentee ballot and did some states. It started and they could do this at the state level say what we just did all valid ballots may that's more effective for our state notify lawsuit said what well this. How can this disproportional effect. People in this part of the male get delivered. As bad as is clearly hear the baby does in rural areas and was the time he what you have it. It would give to return it by but but know it is said again that those those are violating anyone's civil rights and having rules to the game violate civil rights. In fact, I think you have to have rules, the people I cannot understand. I don't think W 2020. There were no rules people are making up rules at the because County pandemic. They were there to the states were just say all you could just at the local level. The makeup their own rule so these register County registrars Ravi figure out what to do about this, but ballot harvesting what to do about early voting what to do about these outside groups that were there were getting in all this was being done because of the situation with COBIT and you had state laws and eat on the books that were being overridden by secretaries of State tried brand work that saying@that's right the Secretary of State. I believe the Michigan will an example of that on her own descendent deciding to send out ballots and so forth. So you know, again, it brings us back to the subject. The Constitution vests the means, manner and method of conducting elections in the state legislatures in the sovereignty of each individual state. These are attempts to federalize the election process entirely. That's what I see this as an unconstitutional. In my view. I think this lawsuit that was filed against the state of Georgia. The election board and the Secretary of State is immensely defensible.

JI think it is a case that that though we are going to look at very carefully while because this is important issue that was but this is another example. The New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner was a Democrat.

By the way, had this to say about HR when using this to basically put HR wanted to affect our state constitution requires that a voter must be present to vote unless a voter is absent from the town or city or physically disabled.

This would also be taken away by HR one. Contrary to our Constitution, HR one require no excuse absentee voting early voting with multiple election days and continuing to receive and count ballots after the election. This is a total violation. If this is what this approach goes into effect of violating exactly what the Constitution says in the elections because an electrical and that's what we're looking at the ACLJ is a question of voter integrity from Silver Dragon where you take your phone calls your comments as well get those ready to go. We come back this break 164, 31 to get a bid on social media Facebook, YouTube, and will get your comment.

Your questions as well be right back on second challenges facing Americans or substantial time and are now in our freedoms, our constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice for decades now ACLJ on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do our work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms then remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member thinking you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.where you can learn more about her life changing work, become a member today ACLJ only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is, is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn Gold edition will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activists ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the Obama care means to discover the many ways your membership is empowering the right question free copy of mission in life today online ACLJ/2 100 684 30 wanted to talk to us on the year one 800 683110 Barbara coming from Pennsylvania online. What he Barbara securely on the voter rule, let me address that a little bit on the front end and I get any comment you will always first of all, the look this lawsuit, abide the Department of Justice is Stan exactly what you said is an attempt to get in place HR one which is failing in the House and Senate will failing in the Senate, so they're doing the litigation get the same result.

Yeah, absolutely. They wanted to complete federal takeover and he attempted to do it through the for the people act, HR one S1. They were not able to accomplish it. So they're moving to the Department of Justice approaching JI think the soundbite that you played or there that you read from the New Hampshire Hampshire Sec. state is really relevant on this because like you don't have to agree with where Georgia comes down on their law or where the Democrat state of New Hampshire come down in their law or the Democrat led state of Colorado comes down on these laws to recognize that there still the right entities for setting the laws in their states much better than Washington DC. Look, if you live in a state where you think maybe the laws are too restrictive. Or maybe you think they need to be more generous. You can go and try to accomplish the change shape if they were to achieve a federal takeover of all of these mechanisms. Everything from what voter ID is required to when you can. Early vote to whether or not you can be automatically registered if all of that is housed in Washington DC when you start seeing abuses of the legislative process.

Guess what, you're knocking to be able to accomplish change in that process when it's controlled by the state.

You can actually accomplish that change and I like Jordan said several times during the course of this broadcast after 2020, a bunch of the states. Both red and blue. By the way Jake have recognized that they need to make changes and that's the process that were seen move forward if they moved to Washington DC. Good luck with that and Barbara as to your question about what state legislatures and you hang understand election laws against DOJ have to defend and we are looking right now for instance, in this particular case I Harry and Andy and a team of ACLJ lawyers are looking at this case is whether the ACLJ because we are constitutional expert will come in and also file a brief in this particular case that's right that we're going to look at this from a constitutional point of view to make our analysis of the case when you look at the allegations of the complaint be looking at what the state and the defendants respond in their answer or their motion to dismiss, whatever it might be and we're going to make an independent judgment as to what we should come in on and what position we should advocate because that's what we do we litigate constitutional issues. You know there's two things here here that I find interesting. Georgia so unlike Georgette Delaware has never allowed early voting in person never allowed early in person voting read going 30 days before 20 days before 17 days before week before which Georgia does allow Delaware the President I stayed home state does allow that. Until now, they will start doing it in 2022.

Voter identification Georgia has now caught up with Minnesota and requiring a driver's license or other type of ID for absentee ballot verification voter identification is not a racist-based approach to voting.

Harry absolutely not.

Voter ID laws. In essence, are the bedrock of democracy.

It allows the government to identify who is entitled to vote and then allows them to vote. It's important to note that 80% of African-American voters support voter ID.

It's also important to note that a majority of voters both Democrat and Republican support voter ID laws and thirdly, it's important to note that voter ID laws are supported by something called common sense.

So at the end of the day the objections to voter ID regulations in the Georgia law mount to a rejection of common sense.

But keep in mind the Democrats are quite prepared to reject common sense when and if it favors their political party.

So at the end of the day. They want to eliminate federalism. They want to federalize the entire election system and they want to try to ensure that they will win each and every upcoming election. Going forward, the American people should reject this highly undemocratic process that the Democrats have engaged in, and Democratic Atty. Gen. Garland I think should be ashamed of himself. In my opinion, he in my opinion now lacks the integrity that he was once famous for every. This is a Getty go to the White House press refuted sake, take a listen to this. This dancer tried to do whether this about politics or the sexy about the lie there true belief about the law take a was no time for HR to the President as we are well allowed to know aid is not meaning to convey that the decision made by the Justice Department to move clearly the priority of the President to take action wherever we can government to make it more accessible to those so you get this this.

It's a back-and-forth it's not. It is, it's not.

It is the truth is, this all goes. How to get the federal government involved more at the state level, so it inside this department just as lawsuit is a request to authorize appointment of federal observers of Georgia elections. They are taking what Georgia did other safe. You look at this as a whole.

This is that this is a racist response to the 2020 election not this is a response to the chaos of the 2020 elections that no state our country doesn't want to keep going through that we have to have rules of the game clearly laid out so that all the candidates know what to follow all the campaigns and what to follow and that we know what the laws are and we don't you what you can do and what you can't do and what's that's by the state for the states to determine and this is this is all again this is about it does not matter to the department justice. These provisions which abated more generous in the state law or these comparisons what they will try to say is you can ever compare Georgia historically to New York.

You never compare Georgia historically to Pennsylvania and so there always could be treated differently even though this record is said history has passed, it's time to stop treating states differently based off what happened in 1865. I think that I think the reality that is when you read the lawsuit that sets and is biased in the animus by the Department of Justice here against Georgia for making common sense constitutional modifications to their voting laws which are still more generous than most states shows you what what's really going on here.

This is whatever Jen Saki wants to say and if the end of the date this politics is politics.

It's the old-fashioned political grab by the Democratic Party.

I think Harry Hutchison pointed out very astutely when he said look at the history of the Democratic Party in terms of civil rights legislation, who oppose the Civil Rights Act of 1960 4J it was Democratic senators. This was the Democratic Party that was pressing this and as Jordan has just said what this is what the Georgia legislature did in Senate Bill 202 was a response to the chaos of the 2020 election in an attempt to reestablish integrity in the election process. That's all it was and if you look at this complaint as I have compared to other states like for example we said you know in New Hampshire there is a voting day or absentee ballot only. That's it that's in New Hampshire you can't do any other way when is Merrick Garlington to bring the suit against New Hampshire. I'm waiting for that is that can happen, or Delaware or Colorado for example that has never allowed early per person voting 15 days groupware allows Virgo skews me voter service and bone centers must be open 15 days before an election and that's two fewer days then Georgia allows early in person voting. I think we should, however, the other thing try to figure out what's the remedy here you can get a lawsuit.

What is the really strike down and say you must have two months of early voting. I mean what what is there and what is the possible remedy that the Department of Justice can get for this task. A brilliant question and I think the answer would be apparent if the DOJ had a coherent position.

The DOJ is a a festival if you will, of incoherence, they don't really know what they are doing so for instance if you look at Kristin Clark. Clark the first black woman to serve as a Assistant Attorney General to the civil rights division. She outlined a number of features which she says violate section 2 of the law, including the fact that the law in Georgia was passed in an irrationally short period of time. Two hours is not enough, perhaps three hours 3 1/2 hours is absurd today. So at the end of the day, the Justice Department telegraphed with Vincennes joints and total power with precisely this is a polygraph by the federal government to try to get a decree to govern the election laws of Georgia as it were dealing with 70 years ago. Yeah, exactly.

And that is probably the largest African-American political influences in this country, which is great. This is why, again, the court is Artie said these laws is not should no longer apply. This way and this is another example of only one.

A society can agree that the most vulnerable. Is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life. We've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn Gold mission will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the end what Obama care means to discover the many ways your membership is empowering the right question free copy of mission in life today online/challenges facing Americans is time and are now free to soar.

Constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do her work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms than remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you, are not well this is the perfect time to stand with us. ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life changing, member today ACLJ testing your photos to 100 684 31 to previously under our laws. This was this was that it was accepted until about lesson 10 years ago the Department of Justice had this rule for states they were considered states that had the Jim Crow laws in place. Basically this the South Southeast of the United States at that you had to have anytime you change the election rules of redistricting. The list went on and be precleared by Department of Justice so you could actually pass the law without first going through public precleared that this report and by the way.

Politically, this divided people there a lot of people were upset with this decision by this record to say you know what this was put in place long enough.

It served its purpose no longer it that doesn't prevent the federal government from go you like they have here Georgia and filing a lawsuit after laws passed but would academically states go through the precleared process and any specifically in this lawsuit. They want that to be reinstated again indefinitely. So were states like Georgia have to the basic Department of Justice is this how it says retains jurisdiction required to do certain voting trades which were to be subject to a preclearance requirement pursuant to section 3C of the voting rights act. Reason why they're having to ask that because that's no longer automatic datalogger of required. That's right.

Sprinkle of the United States did away with the preclearance requirements we had to get preclearance for any changes in your voting laws from the Atty. Gen. of the United States or from a three-judge federal court that was done away with by the Supreme Court of the United States. This lawsuit that is being brought right now by Mayor Garland against the state of Georgia says judge Boulay was the judge appointed to this case my mind point out is an appointee of Pres. from we want you to retain jurisdiction of this case and require certain new changes voting changes to be subject to preclearance.

So were going.

Now back to the 60s within a take the state of Georgia which has a black United States Sen., the city of Atlanta which is a black mayor and a black city Council, the city that the County, which has a black commission, Cobb County, which is the second most populous county, which is predominantly black and its public officials when then County within a take all these things and say we're going to turn the clock back now and say you've got to have preclearance of your voting rules and were going to tell you how to draft them at a Washington DC this I think again goes back to 2013 Dave Dave that this is a group that politically was upset with that holy by this report. They've concentrated had we get back. And that's where they they will draw the line on since this is a New Hampshire right this is a Pennsylvania right though the courts have said. Actually, they should be treated like that now.

They should be be back to be treated like New Hampshire, Pennsylvania. They have met the requirements they have been under this federal preclearance process long enough and now if you have issues with and you can come back in the process. If you if you wish, but they don't they will always try to treat these states differently. Historically, even with the laws are more generous. There, here's the thing.

If the law first good look at what's at issue.

Is there anything in the Constitution that requires early voting answer is no. Number two is there anything in the Constitution that requires ballot harvesting no no. Is there anything in the Constitution that says you have to have absentee ballots it available 90 days before the election. No none of that is in the United States Constitution. What is in the next within the state's constitution is states have the right to establish their rules and regulations for elections so New Hampshire has election day. That's it. Unless you qualify for the absentee vote or disabled so you know the dangerous precedent is the reason why were looking filing a brief year is it is a federal power grab. But it is a federal power grab that is so outside the bounds of the Constitution. Now the question that you gotta ask yourself is, while I think we can beat this one back in talking to our team here fan. I think they're going to still try the legislative route. I don't think that's over now absolutely Aaron he goes directly to conversation the George's had about preclearance. One of the things that Sen. mansion has said he is open to you know he's he's gotten a lot of press over the last couple weeks over his initial opposition to S1 and then eventually supporting proceeding to a bidet he's openly said that he is open to a discussion about expansion of the preclearance so you know through the course of this lawsuit. I can certainly see him coming back and putting a proposal on the table that sort of starts with that and then gets to some of these other mechanics of the jet you ask a second ago maybe maybe in the last segment what the remedy is what what will ultimately satisfy the Department of Justice in this case and I really think the answer to that is a political one. I think the only thing that will satisfy them is if a state votes blue if they don't vote dependably blue Jay, and I think you can continue to see these lawsuits but New Hampshire, Colorado, New York, then I can see the loss in the remedies could also be that they want that the department of justice gets to oversee the election laws of the states Harry at bottom here at you when you look at the longer you look at the history and put it all together.

What is what your sense of what's going on here. Well, I think it ultimately comes down to one thing and one thing only that the Democrats from Washington wish to control each and every state with respect to their voting and they want to ensure that voting whatever the voting rules are continues to favor them. So for instance if you look at this litigation. There's nothing that would prevent the DOJ for instant from suing the state of Georgia for its failure not to extend voting why because of inclement weather. There was snow in Atlanta on let's say November 3. They could decide if we accept the validity of the slick litigation that that should indeed be something that the courts should intervene on the should extend voting perhaps they should extend voting when until the Democrats went that ultimately is there and then they say that enjoining the defendants and their agents and successors in office from excessively limiting the number of absentee ballot drop boxes and prohibiting their availability after hours and in the days leading up to the election when the world gives that authority to the federal government or a judge or the Department of Justice. The whole idea again, what is the after hours with the prohibiting the availability the idea that the nonstate actors were running these drop boxes. This was one of the issues at 2020 and how do you have a lecture during a pandemic, and what exactly do you do it. A lot of states were delegating authority downhill very most local level to try to get through the election and cause a lot of problems because a lot of lawsuits because a lot of questions about the voter at the integrity of the vote because we've never seen before.

This mass mail out of ballots that no one requested so Pete, you would open your mail and we all give these examples if you had lived in a couple different place last decade they had changed the voter rolls. You can ask for a ballot but one came to you, it was live. It was a request, it was even like that I just sent you every B by the saponins of live ballots all across the country and these but boxes to drop off you to show up, even to the actual location. This idea was whether you believe there is fraud or not, whether you believe all those issues, we should have that in the back of people's minds the night since America during an election, they should at least have the confidence that the vote was counted legally in the rule everybody had to play by the same rules. If you didn't play both rules there are consequences. But you know what the rules were. It was about how he took past law that was how large you have to comply with that years couple of years to Artie supplies before major election of Georgia. They have time to figure out how to comply with the law where a nation of laws and rules. That's what makes America what is fair for everyone. And the idea that they would take this out. So for down to the process would help bail Democratic candidate, but hurt the country long term 2020 and the election was the example ACLJ on the frontlines protecting your freedom is defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side.

If you're already a member. Thank you.

If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us, ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ