4 ms·

> If there's a smoking gun, such as a leaked internal memo, I would agree totally. What about a variety of direct quotes from the heads of different state Repu

> If there's a smoking gun, such as a leaked internal memo, I would agree totally. What about a variety of direct quotes from the heads of different state Republican parties? https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/us/some-republicans-acknowledge-leveraging-voter-id-laws-for-political-gain.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/us/some-republicans-ackno... >Yes, for closing the polls early, not for voter id laws. The judgment is on a law that affects both.

jimmywanger 7y ago
> What about a variety of direct quotes from the heads of different state Republican parties? https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/us/some-republicans-ackno.. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/us/some-republicans-ackno.... That shows no evidence that they are willing to make their views public or that they are shared by republicans on a national level. There is absolutely no evidence for that. > The judgment is on a law that affects both. That is not in evidence. The article you cited did not link the court decision mentioned. The court decision is only speaking to the decision to close polling spots on Sunday because it will suppress black, and majority Democratic voters.