Supremes have Dems singing

With the November general election just about a month away, the latest Quinnipiac public opinion poll showing Republican Gov. John Kasich with a double-digit lead over his Democratic challenger Ed FitzGerald meets the definition of political death knell.

So why were Democrats sounding more belligerent last week than they’ve sounded in a long time? Why weren’t they walking around with their chins dragging the floor? Why was there a spring in their step?

Call it Supreme (as opposed to Divine) intervention — the 5-4 ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in a case involving voter participation in the November election in Ohio.

The case was taken to the top court by Republican Secretary of State Jon Husted, who disagreed with the findings of two federal courts that the reduction of the early-voting period from 35 days to 28 days was a violation of the federal Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution.

Partisan divide

The five conservative members of the Supreme Court found in favor of the Republican secretary of state. The four liberal justices concluded that voter access was a matter to be determined on a state level and, therefore, ruled against Husted.

In analyzing the 5-4 decision, some legal experts wondered why Ohio’s reduced early voting period was challenged in the federal courts by voting rights groups, national black organizations, the League of Women Voters and others. The experts warned that other states seeking to erect barriers to open voting, such as the Photo ID requirements, would be spurred into more aggressive action.

The Supreme Court majority in the Ohio case did not give a reason for upholding Secretary of State Husted’s appeal of the lower court rulings.

However, it wouldn’t be far-fetched to conclude that “It’s like deja-vu, all over again,” in the words of the great American philosopher, Yogi Berra.

Remember the 2000 presidential election when Republican George W. Bush was handed the presidency over Democrat Al Gore by a 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court ruling? Again, five conservative justices ruled in favor of a Republican. And, again, four justices disagreed.

Fourteen years ago, Democrats portrayed the Supreme Court ruling as a GOP ploy to steal the election for Bush.

Today, Democrats in Ohio are characterizing the 5-4 decision in the voting access case as an attempt by Republicans to close the window of opportunity for minority voters to cast their ballots at their convenience.

Not only did the conservative justices through their ruling reduce the number of early days for voting, but they eliminated Golden Week and weakened the “Souls to Polls” initiative by canceling Sunday voting on Oct. 26. “Souls to Polls” in black churches was successful in the election and re-election of Barack Obama.

As U.S. District Court Judge Peter C. Economus, formerly of Youngstown, noted in his ruling that found against Husted in the reduction of the early-voting days, the Sunday before the election is critically important to black voters. That’s because they leave church and head straight to vote.

Constitutional importance?

But even though Judge Economus’ thoughtful, legally solid opinion was upheld by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, Husted wasn’t about to throw in the towel. The U.S. Supreme Court was asked to intervene — and it did because five conservative justices found the issue to be of great constitutional importance.

But while early voting has suffered a defeat, Democrats in Ohio have found new energy. Until the ruling, their statewide campaign was on life support because gubernatorial candidate FitzGerald’s campaign had imploded.

With turnout being the key to victory in November, Democratic Party leaders had worried that black voters and other minorities would stay home. In 2008 and 2012, Obama won the presidency because black voters came out in force.

These same voters were taking a pass in this election, but now Democratic leaders may have a compelling pitch for blacks to vote: Republicans want to return you to the pre-civil rights days when you were discouraged from going to the polls by all the barriers that had been erected by law.

The United States Supreme Court ruling is being held up as a reminder of this nation’s sordid past.