Biden’s DOJ sends officials to polling sites, potentially impacting nearby elections.

The Biden Administration’s Interference in State‍ and Local Elections

In a bold move to influence ⁤state and local elections, the Biden administration is deploying federal agents to monitor polling places in several states during Tuesday’s off-year⁤ elections.

The U.S. ⁢Constitution⁣ entrusts states, ​not the federal⁣ government, with the primary oversight and administration of elections. However, ⁢the Department⁢ of Justice, which has become highly politicized, claims that state and local election officials‍ cannot be trusted⁣ to uphold the law. Consequently, the agency has decided to forcefully insert itself into the process.

According to ​a press⁣ release issued on Monday by ‍the​ DOJ, federal observers from its ‌Civil Rights Division will be dispatched to “monitor for​ compliance‌ with the federal voting rights ⁢laws” in various jurisdictions across the⁤ country. Some of the locations listed include Union County, New Jersey; ‍Pawtucket and Woonsocket, Rhode Island; Madison⁤ County and ‌Panola County, Mississippi; and Prince William County, Virginia.

For instance, in Union County, a consent decree proposed by the DOJ earlier this year was approved ⁤by a U.S. district court. This decree compels local election officials to provide a comprehensive Spanish-language election program‍ for voters during the ⁤state’s ⁣November 7 elections. It also authorizes federal observers to monitor polling places throughout the county. The ​DOJ filed this consent decree in conjunction with a‌ lawsuit alleging that Union County officials ⁤violated‌ the Voting Rights Act by failing to provide such materials.

The DOJ claims ‍that its Civil Rights Division enforces federal voting rights laws⁤ to protect the rights of all citizens to access‍ the ballot. The​ division regularly deploys its​ staff to monitor compliance with federal​ civil rights laws​ in elections across the country.

Aside from New Jersey, Virginia, Mississippi, Pennsylvania,⁢ Ohio, Kentucky, and several other states will determine the outcome of ‌critically important⁢ elections on Tuesday.

This is⁤ not the first time the DOJ has engaged in this type of⁢ election meddling. Last ⁤year, during‌ the midterm elections, ‍the agency​ carried⁣ out a similar scheme. As Victoria Marshall wrote, most of the 64 jurisdictions ⁢the DOJ “monitored” ‌during⁣ the‌ 2022 elections⁣ were Democrat strongholds or swing districts in states with​ key midterm contests.

Similarly, the ‍jurisdictions being surveilled by the DOJ on ‍Tuesday are mostly Democrat strongholds. For example, during Virginia’s 2021 gubernatorial race, Democrat candidate Terry McAuliffe won Prince William County⁣ by nearly⁢ 15 points over⁢ now-Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican. Union, Pawtucket, and Woonsocket Counties all voted ⁣for Joe‌ Biden ‍during the 2020 presidential election.

The DOJ’s increasing efforts to⁢ “monitor” local and⁣ state elections seem to be aimed at ⁣curtailing the legitimate ‍right of GOP poll watchers to oversee U.S. election administration.‍ As more conservatives participate in ‌this legal form of election oversight, ‌legacy media‍ has been running hit ‌pieces warning that MAGA ​Republicans volunteering ‌as poll watchers are plotting⁢ to disrupt​ elections throughout the country.

Despite the left’s doomsday predictions, which ⁤never ⁤materialized, regime-approved media continues to perpetuate the lie that election ⁢workers are under constant ⁤threat from Republicans. Even the Biden DOJ’s own data shows that ‍there is no widespread threat to election workers. ⁤Nevertheless, so-called “journalists” unquestioningly echo their Democrat allies’ falsehoods.

Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of ​Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content​ writer for Convention of ‌States Action, ⁤and his work has been featured in numerous‌ outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him‌ on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood.

How does the Department‌ of ‌Justice⁢ justify its interference in ‍state and local ​elections, ⁤despite the primary oversight and administration of elections‍ being entrusted to the states?

Portant state and local elections during Tuesday’s off-year elections.‍ These elections, though often ⁢overlooked, play a pivotal role in shaping policies and determining the⁢ direction ⁤of various states ‌and communities.

However, the recent decision by the ‌Biden ​administration to deploy federal agents to monitor polling places has raised concerns ⁤and sparked a heated‌ debate about the‌ interference of‍ the federal ‍government ‌in state and local elections. As stated in the​ U.S. Constitution, the ‍primary oversight and administration of elections is entrusted to the states, ‌not the federal government. Nevertheless, the Department of Justice, ⁢which has become ⁢increasingly politicized, claims that state and local election officials cannot be trusted to uphold the law, prompting their⁤ forceful insertion into the process.

In a press release issued on Monday, the Department of Justice announced that federal observers from its Civil Rights Division would be⁤ dispatched to⁢ monitor compliance with federal voting rights ‌laws in ‌various​ jurisdictions ⁢across the country. These ​observers will be ⁢present ‍in locations‌ such as Union County, New Jersey; ⁢Pawtucket ​and Woonsocket, Rhode Island;⁣ Madison County and Panola County, ‌Mississippi; and Prince ⁤William ​County, Virginia.

One example of this interference can⁢ be seen in Union ⁤County, where ​a consent decree proposed by the DOJ earlier ⁣this ​year was approved by a ‍U.S. district court. This ‍decree requires local election officials to provide a comprehensive Spanish-language ⁤election program for ⁤voters during the state’s ⁤November 7 elections and authorizes federal observers to ⁢monitor polling places throughout the county. The DOJ filed this​ consent decree⁢ in response to ​a lawsuit alleging that Union County officials violated the ‌Voting Rights Act by failing ⁤to provide‍ such materials.

The Department⁤ of Justice argues that its Civil Rights Division enforces federal voting‌ rights laws to protect the⁤ rights of ‌citizens to ‌access the‌ ballot. They claim that their ⁢staff regularly monitors compliance‍ with federal civil rights laws in elections across the country.

However, opponents of this move ​believe that it ⁤undermines the ⁣principle of ⁢federalism ​and‌ infringes on the ‍rights of states to self-govern. They argue that the ⁤federal government should ​not interfere in elections that are constitutionally entrusted to ​the ⁣states. ​These ‍critics believe that state and local‌ election officials are well-equipped ⁣to handle the administration and oversight of elections and that the federal government should respect the⁤ autonomy and sovereignty of the states.

Furthermore, the timing of this interference is ⁢also being​ questioned. The off-year elections ⁤are traditionally seen as an opportunity for local voters to voice ​their concerns and make decisions that directly impact their communities.​ By inserting federal agents into this⁣ process, some argue that the Biden administration is ⁢exerting undue influence and potentially ‌altering‌ the outcome ‍of these elections.

Ultimately, ⁣the ongoing debate surrounding ⁤the Biden administration’s interference‌ in state and local elections raises important ⁤questions about the balance ⁤of power between the federal government‌ and the⁤ states. It highlights the ‌need for ​a⁣ careful examination of the constitutional principles that govern ⁢elections and the role of ⁤the federal⁢ government in ensuring the protection of voting rights. As these debates continue, the outcomes of ‌Tuesday’s off-year elections will carry significant weight and may shape the path forward for future state ‍and local elections.

*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases