The hallmark of a democracy is that each of us are encouraged and allowed to vote, and that all our votes are counted. That's the theory anyway. The reality can be much different.
Over the course of our history, many people were barred from voting. In the early years of our republic, non-property owners were prohibited from voting. Persons of color were totally excluded because of their condition of servitude, which was only remedied by three constitutional amendments and a series of court cases eliminating state action designed to suppress voting: a poll tax, administration literacy tests, and outlawing "white primaries."
After the Civil War, women were permitted in some, mostly western, states to vote. However, it took a constitutional amendment to give women the right to vote.
By the middle of the 20th Century, especially in the south, persons of color were still discriminated against, some by white non-governmental actors, and others by white governmental actors. Their purpose was to suppress the vote as much as possible so that those in power could remain in power. Things began to improve after the enactment of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and its enforcement for about the next four decades. Not long ago, the Supreme Court took the teeth out of the Act, leaving only its unenforceable shell. The reason given by the Chief Justice was that there was no longer any need for such a statute. It appeared, unbeknownst to many of us, that we had entered into a new Age of Enlightenment.
When the act fell, it didn't take long before some local and state jurisdictions sought to limit voting participation. Targeting specific groups, voter rolls were purged, voting locations were reduced in targeted communities, and reducing the operating hours of the polls. Voting suppression comes in many forms.
Thanks to the Covid-19 pandemic during an election year, more states began offering early voting opportunities: mail in ballots and early in-person voting to complement the traditional same day voting opportunities, all to reduce the number of voters standing in line breathing near each other.
On election eve, this plan seemed to work. Nearly 75% of those voters in 2016 cast early ballots. Election day was supposed to be a breeze. As of this writing, nearly an additional 50 million people voted on November 3.
At present we have no winner in the presidential election, and there's the rub. We're having trouble counting the vote, mostly the early vote. Evidently some states were not adequately prepared for the tsunami of ballots cast before November 3. Some states permitted the processing of ballots days before election day, others the day before, and still others not before the close of the polls on election day.
Moreover, thanks to the sabotage of postal sorting machines and the reduction of postal staff at the order of the Postmaster General, not all legal votes mailed prior to deadline were received until after the polls closed. In some states provision was made for this contingency via legislation and others by litigation.
In this post-election period, one side has initiated court action to prevent the counting of ballots, questioned the integrity of the certification process, and even argued that poll watchers were not placed where they can easily see the processing of ballots. No doubt there will be petitions for recounts of the vote in several states.
This process has a long way to go and the final chapter hasn't yet been written. I've had the opportunity to read some of these complaints and one thing is clear, as of this writing, most if not all of these lawsuits are junk lawsuits. They contain broad specious claims of fraud and impropriety by officials, few supported by any actual allegations of specific facts. In short, there's no there there.
This isn't to say that a situation might arise where there is an actionable case and if so, the party aggrieved has every right to bring a case to court. But so far such situation hasn't arisen.
So my admonition to you is simple: these cases you'll hear and read about are more about politics than they are about the law. This is a political strategy to deliberately undermine the results of the election. This is one final slap at democracy, a slap that has devastating consequences.
Remember, losers don't stop vote counts. Authoritarians do attempt to dismantle democracy and the rule of law.
Don't get caught up in the Post Election Hijinks.
Comments