Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #Brnovich
Most recents (5)
‘Former attorney general in key state withheld evidence debunking 2020 election fraud’
‘Republican Mark #Brnovich’s successor releases reports that debunked claims of fraud in Maricopa county in 2020 election’
#AZAG
theguardian.com/us-news/2023/f…
‘Republican Mark #Brnovich’s successor releases reports that debunked claims of fraud in Maricopa county in 2020 election’
#AZAG
theguardian.com/us-news/2023/f…
“… His successor, the Democratic attorney general Kris #Mayes, released the records, which showed several reports that debunked rampant claims of election problems in Maricopa county.

#Brnovich
#AZAG
theguardian.com/us-news/2023/f…

#Brnovich
#AZAG
theguardian.com/us-news/2023/f…
“… #Brnovich, a Republican, was running for US Senate in 2022 while his office oversaw an investigation into the 2020 election.”
#AZAG
theguardian.com/us-news/2023/f…
#AZAG
theguardian.com/us-news/2023/f…
“It has not been shown that their actual administration was evil, but only that evil was possible under them.” Although this sentence mirrors Alito’s language in #Brnovich, it’s actually an excerpt from another #SCOTUS decision... 1/ 
This language is from the 1898 Williams v Mississippi decision, which upheld the MS constitution’s use of poll taxes, literacy tests, the grandfather clause & more.
Just as today’s court tries to attribute discriminatory impact of Arizona’s law to other issues (education, income, etc), the 1898 court identified characteristics such as “careless, landless, migratory” etc. After all, “weak and vicious white men” could be impacted as well 🤨.
We are fighting against the most concerted state-based effort to undermine Black voting strength since the Civil Rights Mvmt. And in that context, the Supreme Court has again, & w/abandon, shredded a core provision of the Voting Rights Act.
The move is bold. The announcement of a new "test" for vote denial cases - jettisoning the "totality of circumstances" test that has been adjudicated by trial & appellate cts for decades in these cases & replacing it w/a test that put a hand on the scale for "state interests."
The test itself is deeply cynical. First, the bait & switch. While the Shelby Court insisted we must not focus on the past, but must take acct of the new voting landscape, the Court in Brnovich suggests a presumption of validity for voting measures that were in place in 1982.
Opening words of Justice Kagan’s dissent in Brnovich, the SCOTUS voting rights case. It’s now far more difficult to challenge state laws that discriminate on the basis of race. In his concurrence, Justice Gorsuch questions whether private parties can even bring §2 cases.
Kagan writes: “Today the Court undermines §2 & the right it provides…Wherever it can the majority gives a cramped reading to broad language.” The majority permits states to “pour old poison into new bottles.”
As I predicted, the Supreme Court upheld Arizona's requirement that, for counties that use a "precinct based" model for voting, voters must cast their ballots in their correct precinct to be counted. It also upheld Arizona's ban on ballot collection/harvesting. #BrnovichvDNC
The second sentence of the opinion: "Arizona law generally makes it very easy to vote."
In #BrnovichvDNC, the SCOTUS notes that in Arizona, "no special excuse is needed" to vote early during the 27-day early voting period. That's part of what "generally makes it easy to vote in Arizona." (Some states require a "reason" to vote early, and/or have shorter periods).
