• 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.