Nate Cohn

@Nate_Cohn ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated No

Last Checked July 8, 2021

Created

Thu Jul 08 15:33:48 +0000 2021

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

In the worst case--which is a possibility--the court could simply use the availability of multiple options to whittle away at all of them, leaving voters with multiple mediocre voting options — PolitiTweet.org

Posted July 8, 2021

Preceded By

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Take the Arizona third-party collection rule. The plaintiffs said it burdened Native Americans, who don't have equal access to mail service. So what's the voting rights violation: the lack of accessible voting options or the ban on third-party ballot collection? — PolitiTweet.org

Posted July 8, 2021

Followed By

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

But the 1982 standard offers a defense for voting rights activists here. No, it doesn't protect new *methods.* But it does protect a certain level of voting access that ensures that the *burden* isn't greater than 1982 — PolitiTweet.org

Posted July 8, 2021