A sneakier tactic is also included in the bill, which makes it much easier and far more personally consequential for private political groups or indivduals to sue not only states but also election officials. This is in the section of the bill labeled “Private Right of Action,” also known as “standing.”
A query of Google AI returned this summary:
Q. How does the SAVE Act affect private rights of action?
A. Key Impacts of the act on Private Right of Action:
*Targets Election Officials: The Act enables private individuals or organizations to sue election officials if they believe the law is not being strictly enforced, specifically for allowing voter registrations without DPOC.
* Broadens Legal Liability: It creates a direct, new private right of action against local election officials who fail to comply with the new documentation standards, even if they act in good faith.
* Encourages Litigation: Critics argue this provision could lead to a surge of lawsuits (an “avalanche of litigation”) against election officials, particularly in states with high mail-in or online registration rates.
* Supplements Criminal Penalties: The private right of action works alongside new criminal penalties that can see election officials fined or imprisoned for up to five years for registering applicants without sufficient proof of citizenship.
* Encourages politically motivated lawsuits against administrators.
* Creates a “chilling effect,” where officials become overly cautious and reject valid applications for fear of being sued or prosecuted, even if the voter is a U.S. citizen.
So essentially, this gives groups like Dixie Darrow’s favorite, Judicial Watch and its hunky president, much more power to harass anyone they don’t like with impunity, all in service of disenfranchisement.
Gene Dieken
Below: Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch and his good buddy
