DOJ Is Suing Georgia Over Voting Law

The Department of Justice is suing the State of Georgia over a new voting law – SB 202. After several key races in Georgia had cast doubt for voters, Georgia lawmakers crafted an election bill that revised their former election laws to ensure fair and secure elections. The Left is claiming that this new law is blatant voter suppression.

SB 202 imposes new voter identification requirements for absentee ballots, expands early voting access for some voters, regulates ballot drop boxes, and bans the distribution of food and drinks to waiting voters by non-poll workers. By the way, New York also bans the distribution of food and drink to voters at polling locations. Several other states have similar provisions like those that were made into law in Georgia.

So, why is the Department of Justice not suing other states that have voting laws that are just as strict as Georgia’s?

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland delivered remarks announcing the lawsuit against the State of Georgia:

I explained that the Justice Department is rededicating its resources to enforcing federal law and to protecting the franchise for all eligible voters. And I promised that we are scrutinizing new laws that seek to curb voter access and that where we see violations of federal law, we will act. In keeping with that promise, today, the Department of Justice is suing the State of Georgia. Our complaint alleges that recent changes to Georgia’s election laws were enacted with the purpose of denying or abridging the right of black Georgians to vote on account of their race or color in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

ACLJ Director of Policy Harry Hutchison gave his rebuttal to the Attorney General’s remarks:

I think it is very important to actually look at the specifics of the law. So, if you compare the Georgia law to New York, to New Jersey, to Pennsylvania, to Delaware – Joe Biden's home state – it turns out that Georgia makes it easier. Georgia provides more access and more rules with respect to allowing absentee voting than many of these states. Yet, the individuals in the blogosphere – the social media accounts – they are claiming without 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. At the end of the day, what we should keep in mind is that the opponents of the Georgia law are opposing what is not on the basis of principle or a specific provision, 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 a fair voting scheme is only a scheme that favors the Democratic party.

After the 2020 election, state legislatures realized some aspects of current voter laws needed to change on a state-by-state basis. Those changes are necessary to maintain the integrity of our elections. Voting identification is a way to do just that.

Professor Hutchison also proposed that implementing voting identification practices is not a racist-based approach to voting:

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 percent of African American voters support voter ID laws. 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. At the end of the day the objections to voter ID regulations in the Georgia law amount 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. . . . They want to federalize the entire election system and ensure they will win each and every upcoming election going forward. The American people should reject this highly undemocratic process.

The dangerous precedent that is prevalent in this lawsuit is the federal power grab attempt. Federalizing our elections is detrimental to the process in the long run and 2020 was an example of that. The ACLJ will continue to defend the integrity of our elections.

Today’s full Sekulow broadcast is complete with even more analysis of the Department of Justice suing the State of Georgia over SB 202.

Watch the full broadcast below.