Peach Tree Times

It appears increasingly likely that election reforms that Gov. Brian Kemp signed into law (Senate Bill 202) in March will stand up to a host of lawsuits, including one from the U.S. Justice Department, alleging it suppresses minority voters.

In early July, a federal judge denied a motion by a voting rights group, the Coalition for Good Governance, to invalidate parts of Georgia’s new law, as reported by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Also in July, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in another case alleging discrimination, Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, that no one was denied equal opportunity to vote under two Arizona rules, one that restricts political groups from third-party collection of ballots (ballot harvesting), and also invalidates votes cast in the wrong precinct on Election Day.

The DNC charged that the voting rules in Arizona violated the anti-discrimination provision, Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and the 15th Amendment’s ban on intentional race discrimination in voting.

Gov. Brian Kemp of Georgia.

The DOJ is challenging Georgia under Section 2 of the 1965 law.

If the allegations were supported by sound legal arguments, many state election laws would be vulnerable to challenges since the Georgia law is “pretty much in the mainstream” of elections laws, Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project, told the conservative Heritage Foundation. He further noted that the Georgia election rules covering absentee ballots and early voting “are a lot more progressive than what’s in blue states.”

The Heritage Foundation said that allegations that a voter ID provision in the law, and another provision that supposedly bans access to water for those waiting in line to vote, are intended to suppress the vote are nonsense.

“The Georgia law’s voter ID language is not onerous, and makes exceptions for people without ID to provide their Social Security number,” Heritage wrote in an analysis soon after the enactment of the law.  “Furthermore, ID requirements do not suppress voters, as studies have shown. Claims that African Americans are unable or unwilling to obtain identification are insulting and have no factual basis.”

On the charge of denying water, Heritage wrote, “The law allows for self-service water from an unattended receptacle. The law protects voters from political solicitation within 150 feet of a voting building (see line 1818 of the law). Voters are of course allowed to bring water with them.”

The Georgia law, according to a Townhall report, protects absentee voting with a voter ID requirement, mandates requests for absentee ballots, uses security paper for absentee ballots, secures drop boxes, prohibits local election officials from accepting private money to offset election management costs, updates voter rolls, allows ballot observers greater access to the election process and mandates that ballot tabulations occur all at once instead of in segments.

After its dismissal, the Georgia Secretary of State’s Office called the Good Governance lawsuit “just another in the line of frivolous lawsuits against Georgia’s election law based on misinformation and lies. “We will continue to meet them and beat them in court,” according to WSB-TV Atlanta.