Election Laws Quotes

We expect elections to have contribution limits, and we expect to follow them.

No free Negro, mulatto, or Indian, whatsoever, shall hereafter have any vote at the election of burgesses, or any other election whatsoever

This Court now concludes that independent [political] expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.

If I've done anything wrong, I believe it's his fault.

Voter ID laws have a disproportionate impact on groups that lean democratic - including blacks, hispanics and students.

To make it hard, to make it difficult almost impossible for people to cast a vote is not in keeping with the democratic process.

North Carolina precinct chairman and GOP executive committee member Don Yelton thinks his state's new voting restrictions are just fine.

I've never seen my filings. I've instructed my campaign to review my filings and check and see if any don't comply with state election laws, and return them.

This civil rights program about which you have heard so much is a farce and a sham—an effort to set up a police state in the guise of liberty. I am opposed to that program. I fought it in Congress. It is the province of the state to run its own elections.

I will devote none of my time to developing laws to increase my own patronage and multiply canvassers [electors] in my favor.

... a very foolish lapse of judgement on my part.

Registration is a necessary—but not sufficient—condition for voting.

Throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.

I will not be doing Super-Pacs of any sort. I think allowing unlimited contributions to campaigns is a terrible and an unfortunate step towards plutocracy.

It does look like it's almost like South Africa to this extent: You have a white - what's the word - feeble minority. It's losing its majority status. And it says, the Republican Party, 'We can only get so many white votes. So, we got to reduce the votes of others.' It does look that way. Only the - maybe you're non-partisan, but only Republicans have pushed this in these 31 states. No Democratic legislature. You gotta look at the pattern here. You talk about profiling. I'm sorry, Republicans do this stuff.

First of all, it's important to note that the federal government doesn't have the authority to take anybody off of any voter rolls. The states are in control of each of their voter rolls in the 50 states.

In 1984, one out of four campaign dollars was budgeted for accountants and lawyers to circumvent—or comply with—the law.

While the United States is a prime example of fair elections, there is room for improvement, starting with passing voter identification laws across the country.

I would not be surprised. The voter ID, they're fighting as hard as you can fight so that that they don't have to show voter ID.

Attorney General Eric Holder, who announced his resignation on Thursday, leaves a dismal legacy at the Justice Department, but one of his legal innovations was especially pernicious: the demonizing of state attempts to ensure honest elections.

New York state and federal election laws allow us to make unlimited expenditures on behalf of or in opposition to candidates so long as we do not coordinate those expenditures.

It's troubling that by eliminating weekend voting hours, the state of Ohio specifically banned a popular voting time of choice for minorities. In Cuyahoga County, which I represent, 56 percent of weekend voters in 2008 were African American while adult African Americans comprise 28 percent of the county population.

I know from firsthand experience that claims of non-existent voter fraud are used to raise fears, steamroll facts, and overcome common sense, resulting in laws that have nothing to do with ballot security and everything to do with voter suppression and discrimination.

An average person like me does not know about stuff like chasing absentee ballots.

Speech is an essential mechanism of democracy, for it is the means to hold officials accountable to the people. [...] The right of citizens to inquire, to hear, to speak, and to use information to reach consensus is a precondition to enlightened self-government and a necessary means to protect it. [...] By taking the right to speak from some and giving it to others, the Government deprives the disadvantaged person or class of the right to use speech to strive to establish worth, standing, and respect for the speaker’s voice. The Government may not by these means deprive the public of the right and privilege to determine for itself what speech and speakers are worthy of consideration. The First Amendment protects speech and speaker, and the ideas that flow from each.