Chuck Schumer Has Temper Tantrum After SCOTUS Rules Against Him
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer had a meltdown after he did not get his way at the Supreme Court. Now, the Democrat tactic of lying, cheating, and stealing elections could come to a bitter end. It was all too much for Cryin’ Chuck Schumer.What happened next?
The Supreme Court divided on party lines on Monday when it decided that the state of Ohio could purge its voter rolls in what has been dubbed the “use it or lose it” policy. The rule stipulates that registered voters who do not vote for two years are sent a notice. If they do not respond to that notice and then do not vote again for two more years, they are removed from the voter rolls, The Hill reported.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion, “It is not our prerogative to judge the reasonableness of that congressional judgment, but we note that, whatever the general ‘human tendency’ may be with respect to mailing back cards received in the mail, the notice sent under subsection (d) is nothing like the solicitations for commercial products or contributions that recipients may routinely discard.
The notice in question here warns recipients that unless they take the simple and easy step of mailing back the preaddressed, postage prepaid card—or take the equally easy step of updating their information online—their names may be removed from the voting rolls if they do not vote during the next four years. See Record 295–296, 357. It was Congress’s judgment that a reasonable person with an interest in voting is not likely to ignore notice of this sort.”
A scathing dissent was authored by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. “The Court errs in ignoring this history and distorting the statutory text to arrive at a conclusion that not only is contrary to the plain language of the NVRA but also contradicts the essential purposes of the statute, ultimately sanctioning the very purging that Congress expressly sought to protect against,” Sotomayor wrote in her dissent which was signed on to by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer.
The real damage was done to Democrat politicians like Sen. Chuck Schumer who rely on the votes of illegal aliens and the dead to help them win elections. In a tweetstorm after the decision, the New York senator tore into the decision.“The ongoing push to disenfranchise American voters, led by the Trump administration and its allies at the state and local level, received a big boost from the #SCOTUS today. This is why elections matter,” he wrote.
The right to vote is the most sacred right we have as citizens. Aggressive voter purge systems like Ohio’s essentially make voting a ‘use it or lose it’ privilege,” he said. “Democracy suffers when laws make it harder for U.S. Citizens to vote. This decision is dangerous and damaging and is NOT why we passed the National Voter Registration Act in ‘93. In fact, this goes completely against the spirit of the law.”
When Congress passed the NVRA, a balance between was struck between the desire to make it as easy as possible for eligible voters to cast ballots and the need for States to maintain accurate voter rolls,” he wrote. “In today’s decision, the #SCOTUS seemingly ignores the rights of the eligible voters who will be denied the right to vote in future elections simply because they chose not to vote in the past.”But for all of his talk, what the senator is truly concerned about is that the ruling makes it tougher to cheat at elections.
That was the intention of the law to begin with. Which makes one wonder, what kind of lawmaker would not want to have fair elections in
the United States? Isn’t that what Democrats have been screaming about since they lost the last presidential election fair and square?