Yes, says Constitutional attorney Robert Barnes.
The SAVE Act was approved in the House and President Donald Trump is pushing the Senate to vote now and pass the controversial voter ID bill aimed at keeping non-citizens from registering to vote.
Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution provides for Congress to regulate Congressional elections, providing that the times, places and manner for holding state rules governing such elections to federal legislative office “may at any time by law” be altered by Congress.
Article IV, Section 2 provides that citizens of each state must be entitled all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states, while Article IV, Section 4 requires the federal government to "guarantee to every state” a “republican form of government.”
Amendment XIV recognizes “the right to vote” for “citizens of the United States,” with Section 5 giving Congress the power to enforce.
Amendment XV recognizes the “right of citizens of the United States to vote”, again affording Congress the power to enforce.
Amendment XIX recognize again “the right of citizens of the United States to vote” and provides Congress the power to enforce.
Amendment XXIV again reinforces “the right of citizens of the United States to vote” with Congress afforded power to enforce.
Amendment XXVI again reinforces “the right of the citizens of the United States to vote” with Congress empowered to enforce.
The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, the so-called SAVE Act, enforces these Constitutional protections and legislative powers.
First, the SAVE Act does not purport to govern anything other than federal elections.
Second, the SAVE Act focuses on limiting voting to “the citizens of the United States” with documentary proof required.
As such, the SAVE Act simply enforces the Constitutional protections for citizens the right to vote by assuring their vote isn’t diluted by non-citizens.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.297297/gov.uscourts.dcd.297297.1.0.pdf
Mishandling national defense information. Very serious.
There are three ways the outlook could play out.
1. The polls and analysts are largely accurate.
a. House: 233 D - 202 R; Senate: 52 D - 48 R
b. Recent polling errors have been greater in the presidential elections while midterms - on the whole - have been more accurate (Silver Bulletin). If largely accurate, Democrats would win a majority of similar size to the 2018 and 2006 midterms and gain a narrow Senate majority.
2. The polls and analysts underestimate Republicans by a normal polling error.
a. House: 221 D - 214 R; Senate: 51 R - 49 D
b. Some of the biggest polling errors this century occurred in reliably red states and districts that underestimate Republican support (The Economist). Given where the competitive races are located this year, another underestimation would be enough to keep Republicans in control of the Senate and to have Democratic House margins in the single digits.
3. The polls and analysts underestimate Democrats by a normal polling error.
a. House: 238 D - 197 R;...
Over the years, I have become convinced sunlight is one of the most essential nutrients for the body. Unfortunately, since no one has a financial interest in promoting sunlight (and it hence has no lobbyists), almost everything we hear instead focuses on why it’s terrible for us. For example, dermatology transformed itself from one of the least desirable specialties in medicine into one of the highest paying ones by rebranding its members as cancer fighters, which required scaring everyone senseless about the sun (while omitting that a lack of sunlight is what causes fatal skin cancers). Despite the billions now spent each year on skin cancer, the total death rate from it remains almost entirely unchanged (all of which is discussed here).
A similar story has played out with the light inside our homes. In 2022, the federal government effectively banned the incandescent bulb on the grounds most of its output is “wasted” as infrared, even though a rapidly growing body of research ...