Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Fifth suit filed against Ga. voting law. Abrams' challenge gets clipped. Masters boss weighs in.

Augusta chairman Fred Ridley

"No one should be disadvantaged in exercising that right, and it is critical that all citizens have confidence in the electoral process," said Augusta Chairman Fred Ridley

Jared C. Tilton/Getty Images

While the number of major sporting events roiled by Georgia's voting law looks to hold steady, now that it's expanded to two, the number of lawsuits to reverse the new restrictions keeps steadily growing.

The Masters got underway Thursday, but not before the Augusta National Golf Club's reputation as proudly insulated from modernity got rattled by the large number of golfers and the club's own chairman speaking out about the biggest civil rights story of the year.

At the same time, civic engagement groups that sent millions of absentee ballot applications to Georgians last year sued to block provisions of the law they alleged would unconstitutionally curtail such outreach. It was the fifth such federal suit filed in the two weeks since Gov. Brian Kemp signed the measure, and more are in the works.


The Republicans in charge of the state government, starting with the governor, have vowed to stand by the law — repudiating those in the business and sports worlds who have protested it and committing to fight all such litigation vigorously.

And they have recently notched a considerable courthouse victory.

A federal judge last week dismissed many of the claims in what had been the most prominent voting rights lawsuit against the state before last month: Fair Fight, a voting organization founded by Democrat Stacey Abrams following her loss to Kemp in the 2018 governor's race, alleged that a raft of laws already on the books in 2018 amounted to unconstitutional voter suppression.

The decision was little-noticed while attention was focused on Major League Baseball moving this summer's All-Star Game out of Atlanta to protest the new law, and then on how the denouncements by major Georgia employers Coca-Cola and Delta Air Lines prompted Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell to urge corporations to "stay out of politics" except for keeping their contributions flowing.

District Judge Steve Jones tossed Fair Fight's challenge to the state's "use it or lose it" law, which cancels the registrations of people who don't vote for several years. He also dismissed complaints that too few voting machines are routinely assigned to majority-Black precincts, poll worker training is slipshod and standards for rejecting completed ballots are too strict.

The most prominent challenge he allowed to go to trial argues against the law requiring an exact match between the information on registration forms and what's in state databases, down to using a nickname or dropping a middle initial. This policy prompted 53,000 people to have their applications rejected in 2018.

The lawsuit filed Wednesday challenges a provision in the new law that says independent groups may only send vote-by-mail applications to Georgians who have not already requested a ballot or voted.

Lawmakers say the purpose is to avoid a repeat of last fall, when voters claimed confusion from the multitude of applications arriving from get-out-the-vote groups — even after they'd already put in a request to vote absentee. The lead plaintiffs, the Voter Participation Center and the Center for Voter Information, say their First Amendment rights are about to get trampled.

The four other lawsuits filed against the new measure challenge its limits on drop boxes, new ID requirements for absentee voters, ballot request deadlines and a ban on volunteers handing out food and water to voters waiting in line.

Augusta Chairman Fred Ridley, delivering his annual "State of the Masters'' address on Monday, broke with tradition by commenting on non-golf headlines, saying calls for a Masters boycott would be counterproductive before not quite explicitly repudiating the new law.

"I believe, as does everyone in our organization, that the right to vote is fundamental in our democratic society," Ridley said. "No one should be disadvantaged in exercising that right, and it is critical that all citizens have confidence in the electoral process."

The last line appears to be a nod to the stated rationale of Republicans in the General Assembly. While critics of the new rules say they are a craven response to the disproved conspiracy theories of former President Donald Trump (the first GOP nominee to lose the state in 28 years), its sponsors assert they have both bolstered election integrity and made it easier to vote in Georgia than before — mainly by expanding the timetable for early in-person balloting.

Many of the golfers participating in the Masters, asked about the law and voting equality, expressed support for strong voting rights without condemning the statute.

"I'm all for getting people to get out and vote and to have a great democracy, and I've chosen to live in this country because I believe this country is the best country," said Rory McIlroy, who was born in Northern Ireland.


Read More

Gavin Newsom, Ben Shapiro, and Donald Trump Finally Agree on a Major Voting Rights Issue
Image: IVN staff

Gavin Newsom, Ben Shapiro, and Donald Trump Finally Agree on a Major Voting Rights Issue

If you asked Gavin Newsom, Ben Shapiro, or Donald Trump whether they put voters first, all three would say yes.

They would say it confidently.

Keep ReadingShow less
Someone tipping the scales of justice.

Retaliatory prosecutions and political score-settling mark a grave threat to the rule of law, constitutional rights, and democratic accountability.

Getty Images, sommart

White House ‘Score‑Settling’ Raises Fears of a Weaponized Government

The recent casual acknowledgement by the White House Chief of Staff that the President is engaged in prosecutorial “score settling” marks a dangerous departure from the rule-of-law norms that restrain executive power in a constitutional democracy. This admission that the State is using its legal authority to punish perceived enemies is antithetical to core Constitutional principles and the rule of law.

The American experiment was built on the rejection of personal rule and political revenge, replacing it with laws that bind even those who hold the highest offices. In 1776, Thomas Paine wrote, “For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other.” The essence of these words can be found in our Constitution that deliberately placed power in the hands of three co-equal branches of government–Legislative, Executive, and Judicial.

Keep ReadingShow less
Crumpled dollar bills, two coins, a wallet, book, glasses, and home phone on a table.

A new economic study shows tariffs are paid overwhelmingly by American consumers, exposing trade policy as a hidden domestic tax.

Getty Images, David Harrigan

The Tariff Receipt Americans Can No Longer Afford

For years, the American public has been told that tariffs are a sophisticated form of tribute, a way to extract wealth from foreign adversaries while shielding the domestic worker. It is a seductive narrative, painted in the bold strokes of nationalistic pride. But as a rigorous new study from the Kiel Institute for the World Economy confirms, the reality is far less heroic. The bill for these trade barriers is not being mailed to Beijing, New Delhi, or Brussels. It is being delivered, with startling efficiency, to the kitchen tables of the American family.

The findings are as clear as they are sobering. After analyzing more than 25 million shipment records totaling nearly 4 trillion dollars, researchers found that American importers and consumers have shouldered 96 percent of the cost of recent tariffs. Foreign exporters, by contrast, have felt a mere 4 percent of the sting. Despite the robust rhetoric emanating from the White House, the data suggests that tariffs function not as a foreign levy but as a domestic consumption tax. The government may have collected 200 billion dollars in customs revenue in 2025, but that money was extracted almost entirely from the pockets of the people it was ostensibly meant to protect.

Keep ReadingShow less