Go back and read your post again. You said a moron with a ballot is more dangerous than a moron with a gun.Really? So the Trump voters aren't, in fact, going to ultimately be responsible for the downfall of the republic? Can it be that all this talk about the "death of duh-moooocracy" was a bunch of hyperbolic horsecrap all this time? Well! I did not see this coming! I guess I have to rescind my statement.
| Arguments for the SAVE Act | Arguments against the SAVE Act |
|---|---|
| 1. Citizenship is a core voting qualification, so it should be verified directly. Supporters argue that if U.S. citizenship is legally required to vote in federal elections, registration should require documentary proof rather than mainly relying on self-attestation under penalty of perjury. (NCSL) | 1. It targets a problem that appears to be very rare. Critics argue the law imposes broad new hurdles even though noncitizen voting is already illegal and available evidence indicates it is uncommon. (AP News) |
| 2. It creates a uniform national baseline for federal elections. Backers say a federal standard would reduce state-by-state variation and set clearer nationwide rules for federal voter registration, much like earlier federal election laws created baseline procedures. (NCSL) | 2. It could block or delay many eligible citizens from registering. Opponents say millions of lawful voters may not have ready access to passports, certified birth certificates, or matching documents, so the bill could burden legitimate voters more than ineligible ones. (AP News) |
| 3. It is meant to strengthen confidence in election integrity. Even if improper registration is rare, supporters say visible safeguards matter because public trust depends on people believing eligibility rules are enforced up front. (The White House) | 3. The burden would fall unevenly on certain groups. Current reporting says married women with name changes, rural voters, lower-income voters, and some naturalized citizens could face disproportionate difficulty meeting documentary requirements. (AP News) |
| 4. It builds on approaches some states already use or are considering. Supporters can argue documentary proof of citizenship is not a brand-new idea; some states already use or are exploring stronger citizenship-verification rules. (NCSL) | 4. It creates major implementation and administrative problems. Critics argue states would need new procedures, training, document-review systems, and dispute handling, which could increase costs, confusion, and registration errors. (NCSL) |
| 5. It treats preventing even small amounts of ineligible registration as worthwhile. The strongest philosophical case is that election legitimacy depends on strict enforcement of eligibility rules, even if the number of violations is small. (NCSL) | 5. It risks turning a constitutional right into a paperwork test. Opponents argue the freedom to vote should not depend on whether a citizen can quickly produce hard-to-obtain records, especially when the underlying fraud justification appears weak. (AP News) |
apnews.com
But they are okay with service of process by mail so long as it postmarked by the deadline in civil procedure...BREAKING: The Supreme Court seems skeptical of laws in 14 states that allow counting of mail ballots that arrive after Election Day.
Supreme Court seems skeptical of allowing states to accept late-arriving mail ballots
The Supreme Court's conservative majority seems skeptical of state laws allowing late-arriving mail ballots to be counted, an election issue targeted by President Donald Trump.
www.wvtm13.com
