Florida Governor Rick Scott’s voting case against the Holder Justice Department has taken a strange but predictable turn. Recall that radical lawyers in the DOJ Voting Section filed a lawsuit against Florida seeking to prevent the removal of foreigners from the voter rolls. Justice has now turned to the print media for “expert” statistical analysis on the racial impacts of Florida’s policies.
It turns out at least 50 of these foreigners have voted in Florida elections. If done in a federal election, this constitutes a federal crime. Yet why has the Justice Department not charged these individuals?
Of course we all know the answer – preventing the removal of the foreigners is more important to Eric Holder than prosecuting the ones who voted illegally.
Now comes the Justice Department’s attempt to obtain an injunction against Florida from proceeding with the removal of the foreigners. DOJ claimed that removal of foreigners would have a racially discriminatory impact. That is, more Hispanics would be removed than whites as a percentage of the population.
Well, so what?
Florida has punched back in this memo:
The fact that a program to remove non-citizen voters affects a large percentage of minorities is neither surprising, nor remotely indicative of impermissible discrimination. Any program that removes non-citizens from the rolls in Florida, even if 100% accurate, will undoubtedly have this result. But DOJ cannot and does not argue that the accurate removal of non-citizens has any impermissible disparate impact.
Translation: of course there will be a disparate racial impact when illegal foreigners are removed from the voter rolls. What else would you expect? That alone doesn’t make it illegal.
DOJ’s purist and radical argument on this point would surprise nobody who has read my book Injustice. This species of radical racialism, where any difference in outcomes with a statistical correlation, justifies the flexing of federal power.