Stacy Abrams is most butthurt.....

Jonathan Turley's latest column.

Quote:“Jim Eagle” has landed… with a thud. President Joe Biden famously (and somewhat bizarrely) used the name “Jim Eagle” to characterize the Georgia election law. Democrats have criticized Georgia rules enacted before and after the 2020 election as voter suppression. The provisions in this lawsuit concerned pre-2020 changes that allegedly made it “harder to register, harder to stay registered and ultimately harder to vote.” Both Stacey Abrams and Joe Biden denounced the Georgia laws in 2020 as voter suppression.

In the meantime, another court refused an injunction sought by the Biden Administration of additional provisions passed after 2020 concerning a ban on political parties supplying water, food, and gifts to people waiting in line to vote. Such injunctions are only secured when there is a substantial likelihood of prevailing on the merits. The provision was emphasized by critics, including President Biden, among the various other changes.

It was not enough to call it “Jim Crow on steroids” and “sick,” President Biden wanted the public to know that the law was flagrantly unconstitutional. Some of us disagreed, but the view that counted was that of U.S. District Judge Steve Jones, an Obama appointee who heard the challenge to the law. This week, Jones found the law to be entirely constitutional. The case involves a challenge filed four years ago.

After being declared the “new confederacy” and subjected to a costly boycott, Georgians could be forgiven if they view Biden’s claim as more foul and fowl.

Given the exhausting media coverage and condemnations of the law, one would expect the legion of legal experts out in force on a judge upholding the allegedly “modern Jim Crow law.” Instead, it has been crickets . . . almost as if the earlier coverage was knowingly exaggerated for public consumption.

Quote:Georgia has noted that the alleged “voter suppression” under the law turned out to be a voter enhancement. According to the secretary of state’s office, 1.9 million eligible voters participated in the 2022 primary contest compared to 1.2 million in 2018. Moreover, African-American turnout was 22% higher than any other primary election except for the 2020 presidential primary.

Quote:Judge Jones wrote: “the burden on voters is relatively low… plaintiffs have not provided direct evidence of a voter who was unable to vote, experienced longer wait times, was confused about voter registration status.” That seems a bit odd for a state widely denounced as engaging in voter suppression before and after 2020.

https://jonathanturley.org/2022/10/04/ji...itutional/

Another nail.

(10-05-2022 11:01 AM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Stacy Abrams is most butthurt.....

Jonathan Turley's latest column.

Quote:“Jim Eagle” has landed… with a thud. President Joe Biden famously (and somewhat bizarrely) used the name “Jim Eagle” to characterize the Georgia election law. Democrats have criticized Georgia rules enacted before and after the 2020 election as voter suppression. The provisions in this lawsuit concerned pre-2020 changes that allegedly made it “harder to register, harder to stay registered and ultimately harder to vote.” Both Stacey Abrams and Joe Biden denounced the Georgia laws in 2020 as voter suppression.

In the meantime, another court refused an injunction sought by the Biden Administration of additional provisions passed after 2020 concerning a ban on political parties supplying water, food, and gifts to people waiting in line to vote. Such injunctions are only secured when there is a substantial likelihood of prevailing on the merits. The provision was emphasized by critics, including President Biden, among the various other changes.

It was not enough to call it “Jim Crow on steroids” and “sick,” President Biden wanted the public to know that the law was flagrantly unconstitutional. Some of us disagreed, but the view that counted was that of U.S. District Judge Steve Jones, an Obama appointee who heard the challenge to the law. This week, Jones found the law to be entirely constitutional. The case involves a challenge filed four years ago.

After being declared the “new confederacy” and subjected to a costly boycott, Georgians could be forgiven if they view Biden’s claim as more foul and fowl.

Given the exhausting media coverage and condemnations of the law, one would expect the legion of legal experts out in force on a judge upholding the allegedly “modern Jim Crow law.” Instead, it has been crickets . . . almost as if the earlier coverage was knowingly exaggerated for public consumption.

Quote:Georgia has noted that the alleged “voter suppression” under the law turned out to be a voter enhancement. According to the secretary of state’s office, 1.9 million eligible voters participated in the 2022 primary contest compared to 1.2 million in 2018. Moreover, African-American turnout was 22% higher than any other primary election except for the 2020 presidential primary.

Quote:Judge Jones wrote: “the burden on voters is relatively low… plaintiffs have not provided direct evidence of a voter who was unable to vote, experienced longer wait times, was confused about voter registration status.” That seems a bit odd for a state widely denounced as engaging in voter suppression before and after 2020.

https://jonathanturley.org/2022/10/04/ji...itutional/

Because it wasnt racist or unconstitutional. Georgia's law was just a series of common sense measures strengthening election security----and Democrats despise election security......I wonder why?

Warnock now has an even taller hill to climb.

Trump won.

by a lot

From the standpoint of campaigning/fundraising, this judicial opinion is irrelevant. Abrams’ media-supporters have already published a few articles that preemptively lay out the excuses Abrams will point to, when she gets crushed by Kemp in the election. She knows it’s over, and it really won’t be that close, either. Abrams will move on to the next scam, the next narrative, the next grift. In fact, if you listen carefully to her speeches the past few weeks, you can detect that she’s already making that pivot.

But just as matter of law/jurisprudence, this is an absolutely Crushing rebuke to just about everything progressives have said about election security over the past few years. This law passed by Georgia is lengthy and can be portrayed as “complicated” by people with an agenda. I was prepared for the judge to single out 2 or 3 phrases and say they are “troubling” and will have a “disparate impact”, blah-blah-blah, and that the Georgia legislature should therefore aamend them. But no — he upheld the entire law. Every sentence, every word, every dash, period, and comma. This massive lawsuit filed by Abrams’ proxies just got totally thrown in the trash.

Good.

Now that it's been determined it's NOT a voting rights issue & Democrats are in fact lying on it (including all the liberal posters here) for their own motives, every red & purple state needs to start passing this kind of **** immidiately & any R candidate not supporting it needs to be replaced. Period.