Fox News
Expand
Browse All Video
Watch Live

You're watching...

South Carolina sues DOJ for blocking voter ID laws

Details

  • Description

    Legal panel weighs in on the case

  • Duration 5:22
  • Date

Clips

Also in this playlist...

Editor's Picks

Auto-advance: ON

Auto-advance
View All

Transcript

This transcript is automatically generated

-- -- -- back in session on the docket today a new lawsuit filed.

In south Carolina's fight over its voter ID law about law says that if you want to vote you need to produce photo identification.

But the Justice Department blocked that law.

Saying it discourages certain people from voting they're worried about disenfranchisement.

The state leaders responded yesterday by filing a lawsuit against the DOJ.

Basically telling the federal government mind your own business.

Joining me now Fox News legal analyst -- wheel and former prosecutor and criminal defense attorney John -- -- -- So South Carolina is fighting back saying bought out defense.

First and foremost -- what right does the federal government have in the first instance to going to South Carolina and say.

We don't like that voter -- line you're not.

That gave to the Department of Justice.

Oversight they called pre clearance of the act they have they say look.

Department justice -- -- -- sixteen states mostly southern states -- there been issues about disenfranchisement especially minorities.

We're gonna get the Department of Justice pre clearance control another words the department say yea or nay to any legislation that's -- in the voting round and and exactly what happened here.

And therein lies the response to people who say that this is an issue you know federalism that the feds are infringing on State's rights -- South Carolina consented I mean it -- they had to do they had to submit laws like this.

To approval by the Fed has given us history of that state that is problematic when it comes to certain.

Racial minorities and that's the feds are worried this -- gonna disenfranchise John having said that the South Carolina attorney general does not think.

That in this particular instance Eric Holder got it right he thinks there's no evidence that this law's going to disenfranchise anybody does he have a.

He does he has a very valid point.

Let's bottom line it give reason for laws like.

What South Carolina wants to pass is to avoid voter fraud okay this little boy in me going into it to register at my dog the dead -- -- and manipulate the vote that -- I get so what that that's how that is look.

We think that there might be 10%.

Not white registered voters who do not have a picture ID we will remedied that by giving them a 31.

Please call -- how can how can that DOJ aren't you with South Carolina on that.

It apparently they are least right at this fact Tom Perez.

Who a lot of our viewers may know he was he was very vocal in defending the decision to drop the case against the new black Panthers and right -- -- -- Did Tom Perez comes out I believe it's in this case and said look.

That out we don't really necessarily buy that that's gonna rectify the problem.

Right and it does put another requirement on which is that you have to go to the -- Department of Motor Vehicles or someplace like that and get that -- Photo ID now South Carolina already requires the state issued ID like a registration card -- Social Security card this at the photo card as photo ID and the departments and what that's adding something that's more onerous.

Look we're only fifteen states in the country now now -- require a photo ID so South Carolina would still be in the minority of requiring that extra but it's been upheld by the Supreme Court and -- -- been that that the process of requiring photo ID has been upheld by the Supreme Court hasn't John.

It definitely has and if we bottom line it again -- Why is it -- to expect that we had a picture idea aren't you -- lawfully here and -- registered to vote.

Why did you go to India -- get up three owner like what -- yeah he needed to buy -- -- one need to -- is the thing I do.

The other problem though is it and particular and South Carolina they have a history with the Department of Motor Vehicles of having.

Talk about pride -- having dead people okay that are that have registered with the department motor vehicles I think the department of the justice probably didn't rightly or wrongly -- you know we're not so sure about the history of South Carolina here and -- -- department of vehicles so they say that there's so much fraud there when it comes to voting that you we can't possibly be concerned about voting and you're -- issue brought an handing out the photo ID and you're about to prevent that's at least a concern for the apartment just decided -- he has about exploded.

But I think -- it.

But the bottom lied to you John afraid.

In that you know that under the under the they're writing have the rights act of 1965 the department of absolute right they have the they have the right but here's what I wanted to because clearly don't have the right in all circumstances to say -- your -- at all decisions so that now South Carolina.

And he can't arbitrate have to be able right back up why they think it's not okay for South Carolina south Carolina's AG is saying on the ticket court over it.

And what's the standard I mean does that AG have to show that this was arbitrary.

Visit air -- got all sorts of stats and facts and big -- -- -- to prove this -- that job.

Hackett at about how can he really this is an attorney general prove a negative I mean how is it going to be able to go in there to holder in -- Think these elections having he does say -- dollar -- problem that.

He is gonna say candidate has they'll support a voter fraud fraud and therefore they don't support your new law and holdings of -- right back to the Department of Motor Vehicles that look you got problems of you that's -- right in the in the very department is supposed to be issuing these but like that the candidate brought -- brought arguments to confusing but that's not a.

Well since the DOJ did not address the intent portion of the argument another like the DOJ said look this result an actual discrimination is we're not even -- get into whether it's South Carolina intended to do they need to get into that good South Carolina doesn't attended is gonna I don't like that I that I got kind of does say that -- --

Load More