Why The Biden Administration’s Lawsuit Against Georgia’s Voting Rules Is Legal Hot Garbage

"The Department of Justice is going to lose," Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger told me during a Friday interview, referring to the Voting Rights Act lawsuit the Biden administration filed against Georgia a little more than a week ago.

In Brnovich, the high court addressed for the first time the meaning of Section 2's "Results in a denial or abridgment" of the right to vote based on race or color in the context of "Generally applicable time, place, or manner voting rules." The court laid out several guideposts for assessing whether voting is "Equally open," as required by Section 2.

The guideposts the Brnovich court delineated include: "The size of the burden; the degree to which the voting rule departed from the standard in 1982 when Congress amended Section 2; the size of the disparity of the rule on minorities; the opportunities provided by the state's entire voting system; and the strength of the state's interests in the law." Applying these guideposts to the provisions of Georgia's Election Integrity Act of 2021 that the Biden administration is challenging establishes the DOJ's lawsuit is completely lacking in merit.

None of the challenged provisions create a high burden to voters in the language of the Brnovich court, represent the "Normal burdens of voting." For instance, the DOJ complained that Georgia prohibits distributing unsolicited absentee ballot applications and bars private organizations from distributing duplicate absentee ballot applications, but the burden of requesting an absentee ballot online or in person is minimal.

Not only do these provisions not establish a burden beyond the general burden of voting, Georgia provides ample alternative opportunities to vote, from absentee voting to early voting to same-day voting.

While in its complaint against Georgia the DOJ portrayed the challenged provisions as affecting minority voters at a higher rate, voting remains "Equally open," meaning "Without restrictions as to who may participate." Further, in Brnovich the Supreme Court expressly rejected "The disparate-impact model employed in Title VII and Fair Housing Act cases," meaning a disproportionate impact on minority voters is not dispositive.

More significant than the question of whether Georgia seeks, or obtains sanctions are the ramifications of Brnovich on Georgia's attempt to shore up voting integrity in the state.

https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/05/why-the-biden-administrations-lawsuit-against-georgias-voting-rules-is-legally-hot-garbage/