SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh attend the State of the Union address in the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives at the U.S. Capitol Building on February 5, 2019 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Doug Mills-Pool/Getty Images)
'Enabling State Voter Suppression Tactics,' US Supreme Court Revives GOP's Ballot Witness Requirement in South Carolina
"It's the first day of the new term and the Supreme Court is already wreaking havoc."
Oct 06, 2020
The conservative-dominated U.S. Supreme Court late Monday largely revived a South Carolina law requiring that absentee ballots contain a witness signature, a Republican-passed mandate that could increase voters' exposure to the coronavirus.
While overturning lower court decisions blocking the requirement, the high court's ruling (pdf) allows for the counting of absentee ballots that have already been mailed in without witness signatures--as long as they are received by state election officials by October 7.
No justices were listed as dissenting from the ruling and right-wing Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito Jr., and Neil Gorsuch said they would have tossed out every ballot without a witness signature, including those sent before the revival of the mandate.
"It's the first day of the new term and the Supreme Court is already wreaking havoc," said the African American Policy Forum. "Under this decision, South Carolina ballots that do not meet the witness requirement will still be accepted if they're received by October 7... But the effect is clear. The Supreme Court is enabling state voter suppression tactics."
\u201cIt begins: SCOTUS reinstates South Carolina witness signature requirement for mail ballots, which is insane restriction on voting during pandemic & social distancing \n\nThis is one of 29 ways GOP making it harder to vote https://t.co/duQ3ZM8Ofb\u201d— Ari Berman (@Ari Berman) 1601944098
In her ruling striking down the ballot witness requirement last month, U.S. District Court Judge J. Michelle Childs wrote that "the evidence in the record points to the conclusion that adherence to the witness requirement in November would only increase the risk of contracting Covid-19 for members of the public with underlying medical conditions, the disabled, and racial and ethnic minorities."
The high court's decision to reinstate the South Carolina requirement less than a month before the November 3 election comes as polling shows President Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden locked in a close race in the state. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is also facing a formidable challenge from Democratic opponent Jamie Harrison, who is neck-and-neck with the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Hours before the Supreme Court's decision, an Alaska court ruled Monday that the witness requirement for absentee ballots in its state is unconstitutional and must be waived for the upcoming election.
"Alaska voters will no longer have to worry about risking their health and well-being to exercise their fundamental right to vote this upcoming November," Pooja Chaudhuri, an attorney with the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said in a statement. "We are glad the court has made it possible for every Alaskan to cast their ballot and have their voice heard in the safest way possible. Amidst a global pandemic, this is a huge success."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
The conservative-dominated U.S. Supreme Court late Monday largely revived a South Carolina law requiring that absentee ballots contain a witness signature, a Republican-passed mandate that could increase voters' exposure to the coronavirus.
While overturning lower court decisions blocking the requirement, the high court's ruling (pdf) allows for the counting of absentee ballots that have already been mailed in without witness signatures--as long as they are received by state election officials by October 7.
No justices were listed as dissenting from the ruling and right-wing Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito Jr., and Neil Gorsuch said they would have tossed out every ballot without a witness signature, including those sent before the revival of the mandate.
"It's the first day of the new term and the Supreme Court is already wreaking havoc," said the African American Policy Forum. "Under this decision, South Carolina ballots that do not meet the witness requirement will still be accepted if they're received by October 7... But the effect is clear. The Supreme Court is enabling state voter suppression tactics."
\u201cIt begins: SCOTUS reinstates South Carolina witness signature requirement for mail ballots, which is insane restriction on voting during pandemic & social distancing \n\nThis is one of 29 ways GOP making it harder to vote https://t.co/duQ3ZM8Ofb\u201d— Ari Berman (@Ari Berman) 1601944098
In her ruling striking down the ballot witness requirement last month, U.S. District Court Judge J. Michelle Childs wrote that "the evidence in the record points to the conclusion that adherence to the witness requirement in November would only increase the risk of contracting Covid-19 for members of the public with underlying medical conditions, the disabled, and racial and ethnic minorities."
The high court's decision to reinstate the South Carolina requirement less than a month before the November 3 election comes as polling shows President Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden locked in a close race in the state. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is also facing a formidable challenge from Democratic opponent Jamie Harrison, who is neck-and-neck with the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Hours before the Supreme Court's decision, an Alaska court ruled Monday that the witness requirement for absentee ballots in its state is unconstitutional and must be waived for the upcoming election.
"Alaska voters will no longer have to worry about risking their health and well-being to exercise their fundamental right to vote this upcoming November," Pooja Chaudhuri, an attorney with the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said in a statement. "We are glad the court has made it possible for every Alaskan to cast their ballot and have their voice heard in the safest way possible. Amidst a global pandemic, this is a huge success."
The conservative-dominated U.S. Supreme Court late Monday largely revived a South Carolina law requiring that absentee ballots contain a witness signature, a Republican-passed mandate that could increase voters' exposure to the coronavirus.
While overturning lower court decisions blocking the requirement, the high court's ruling (pdf) allows for the counting of absentee ballots that have already been mailed in without witness signatures--as long as they are received by state election officials by October 7.
No justices were listed as dissenting from the ruling and right-wing Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito Jr., and Neil Gorsuch said they would have tossed out every ballot without a witness signature, including those sent before the revival of the mandate.
"It's the first day of the new term and the Supreme Court is already wreaking havoc," said the African American Policy Forum. "Under this decision, South Carolina ballots that do not meet the witness requirement will still be accepted if they're received by October 7... But the effect is clear. The Supreme Court is enabling state voter suppression tactics."
\u201cIt begins: SCOTUS reinstates South Carolina witness signature requirement for mail ballots, which is insane restriction on voting during pandemic & social distancing \n\nThis is one of 29 ways GOP making it harder to vote https://t.co/duQ3ZM8Ofb\u201d— Ari Berman (@Ari Berman) 1601944098
In her ruling striking down the ballot witness requirement last month, U.S. District Court Judge J. Michelle Childs wrote that "the evidence in the record points to the conclusion that adherence to the witness requirement in November would only increase the risk of contracting Covid-19 for members of the public with underlying medical conditions, the disabled, and racial and ethnic minorities."
The high court's decision to reinstate the South Carolina requirement less than a month before the November 3 election comes as polling shows President Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden locked in a close race in the state. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is also facing a formidable challenge from Democratic opponent Jamie Harrison, who is neck-and-neck with the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Hours before the Supreme Court's decision, an Alaska court ruled Monday that the witness requirement for absentee ballots in its state is unconstitutional and must be waived for the upcoming election.
"Alaska voters will no longer have to worry about risking their health and well-being to exercise their fundamental right to vote this upcoming November," Pooja Chaudhuri, an attorney with the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said in a statement. "We are glad the court has made it possible for every Alaskan to cast their ballot and have their voice heard in the safest way possible. Amidst a global pandemic, this is a huge success."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.