President Donald Trump's Justice department keeps slapping U.S. courts with a twisted take on Jim Crow-era law they refuse to abandon, according to a new political analysis.
A 22-case losing streak hasn't stopped the Justice department from telling judges nationwide they don't understand Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960, Democracy Docket reported Saturday.
The law is meant to stop states from destroying election records — which courts keep pointing out as the Justice department argues over and over again it grants them the right to grab state voter roll data.
During a hearing in the state of Washington, U.S. District Judge Kymberly Evanson — who has yet to rule on the case — noted the DOJ's losing streak and asked what made the case it brought to her court any different.
"By my count, this is the 20th court to address this exact issue," Evanson said. "Is there any meaningful basis on which to distinguish this case from many other district courts and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals across the country that have dismissed the government's complaints or denied their motion to compel?"
"No, your Honor," DOJ attorney Raymond Yang responded. "Relevant facts are similar to all the other cases."
Yang, however, insisted that previous judges from around the country had "misconstrued the text, context, structure, history, and original understanding of Title III."
According to elections reporter Yunior Rivas, the DOJ keeps coming back to this argument to answer for a "remarkable judicial consensus." The DOJ says the law should force states to hand over live state voter data, including driver's licenses, Social Security numbers, and full birthdates.
However, courts have rejected DOJ's argument "again and again," Rivas noted, in particular denying a DOJ argument that states have to hand over that voter data because states have "come into" possession of election records. However, judges have pointed out that the phrase applies to records election officials have received, not created and changed themselves.