• foggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      …it

      …it isn’t.

      They should have arresting authority over anyone illegally barring them entry.

        • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          If memory serves, Shelby was just about the ability of the DOJ to require states from the former Confederacy to get DOJ’s approval before making any changes to their election laws, where this is about DOJ’s ability to monitor any state’s actual implementation of their election laws

          Either way, illegitimate decision from an illegitimate court that wouldn’t have any precedential value if we lived in a decent country, but yeah, back in the one we actually live in who knows what is and isn’t legal anymore.

          e; DOJs? I’m pretty sure there’s just the one, autocorrect

          • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            If memory serves, Shelby was just about the ability of the DOJ to require states from the former Confederacy to get DOJ’s approval before making any changes to their election laws, where this is about DOJ’s ability to monitor any state’s actual implementation of their election laws

            This is quite incorrect. I would read the link I provided.