A Republican lawyer made a stunning admission to the Supreme Court about a voting rights case

A Republican lawyer made a stunning admission to the Supreme Court about a voting rights case
President Donald J. Trump and Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas listen as Justice Amy Coney Barrett delivers remarks during her swearing-in ceremony as Supreme Court Associate Justice Monday, Oct. 26, 2020, on the South Lawn of the White House. (Official White House Photo by Andrea Hanks)
Frontpage featured

At the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday an attorney for the Republican National Committee admitted GOP candidates need voter suppression laws, especially those that target minority voters, to win.

The high court was hearing arguments related to the historic Voting Rights Act of 1965, which under Chief Justice John Roberts was gutted to be almost useless in 2013 when he infamously announced, "Our country has changed." The Guardian and HuffPost have written he was suggesting that racism is pretty much over.

It is not.

Tuesday's arguments discussed the landmark Voting Rights Act and "an Arizona law that disqualified ballots cast in the wrong precinct," as Mother Jones reports.

The Brennan Center, as The Washington Post, reporting on today's Supreme Court hearing notes, is tracking over 250 bills Republicans are pushing in more than half the states across the country that are designed to take the "voter fraud" lies Donald Trump and his supporters have been pushing for nearly a year and turn them into "legal" voter suppression.

The Supreme Court has changed dramatically in the nearly eight years since it suggested racism isn't a big deal anymore – and not for the better.

But it was the court's newest member, and one of the most right-wing yet, who asked a revealing question.

"What's the interest of the Arizona RNC here in keeping, say, the out-of-precinct ballot disqualification rules on the books?"

That law forces the state to throw out voter ballots if cast in the wrong precinct.

The question was asked by Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

The answer stunned many.

"Because it puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats," the lawyer, Michael Carvin, responded, as Mother Jones reports. "Politics is a zero-sum game," he added.

"It's the difference between winning an election 50-49 and –" he continued, but Justice Barrett wouldn't even let him finish his sentence, perhaps for fear of what else he would say.

"Republicans' intentions couldn't be any clearer," writes Mother Jones' Abigail Weinberg. "It's not about reducing fraud. It's about keeping minorities from voting for Democrats."

Listen as Carvin, a Federalist Society lawyer, very matter-of-factly, and almost condescendingly, admit what Republicans need to do to win:

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Understand the importance of honest news ?

So do we.

The past year has been the most arduous of our lives. The Covid-19 pandemic continues to be catastrophic not only to our health - mental and physical - but also to the stability of millions of people. For all of us independent news organizations, it’s no exception.

We’ve covered everything thrown at us this past year and will continue to do so with your support. We’ve always understood the importance of calling out corruption, regardless of political affiliation.

We need your support in this difficult time. Every reader contribution, no matter the amount, makes a difference in allowing our newsroom to bring you the stories that matter, at a time when being informed is more important than ever. Invest with us.

Make a one-time contribution to Alternet All Access, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you.

Click to donate by check.

DonateDonate by credit card
Donate by Paypal
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}
@2022 - AlterNet Media Inc. All Rights Reserved. - "Poynter" fonts provided by fontsempire.com.