Unfortunately @baseballcrank misreads the GA statute. The prohibition on giving food and water isn’t limited to those who are trying to influence voters. Nor is it limited to candidates and their staff. And so all of the other state laws he identifies are inapposite.
-
-
Perhaps the legislative intent behind the new legislation was benign. But that doesn’t change what the actual text says. It makes it a crime to give the person behind you in line to vote an extra bottle of water as you wait. The unqualified actus reus is written that broadly.
13 replies 38 retweets 264 likes -
What’s worse, is if he’d checked the law as it existed in GA before this bill passed, he’d have seen that trying to influence people’s votes while in line was already forbidden and criminalized under state law.
6 replies 12 retweets 231 likes -
Replying to @CBHessick @baseballcrank
The article notes that in showing prior law.
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @jadler1969 @CBHessick
One, this clarifies the existing prohibition. Two, as I explained, it aims narrowly at potential influence - you can still sell openly or donate indirectly, you just can't give direct handouts to voters at the polling location.
7 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
It doesn’t aim narrowly. It outlaws giving voters water to encourage them only to stay in line to vote, not to influence their vote, which was already illegal. Your article misleads readers into thinking otherwise. https://sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/secretary_raffensperger_cracks_down_on_line_warming_loophole …pic.twitter.com/t92AFD1Qan
1 reply 2 retweets 31 likes -
There need not even be the motive of giving the water in order to encourage them to stay in line. Giving the water is now a crime, no matter what the motive.
1 reply 7 retweets 52 likes -
How would you propose a workable motive requirement? This is a prophylactic law that is designed to be enforced evenhandedly by cops on the scene.
12 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
First of all, the criminal law often criminalizes conduct based only on motive--laws that are enforced by cops on the scene. Happy to share my law review article that chronicles some of those laws with you if you are interested.
2 replies 6 retweets 52 likes -
Replying to @CBHessick @baseballcrank and
Second, I'm not sure why you think the previous law didn't cover giving food and drinks to people to encourage them to vote a different way. It prohibited solicitation in any manner by any means or method. Do you disagree with that reading, because the text seems quite clear.
2 replies 7 retweets 47 likes
What would you consider evidence that it was done "to encourage them to vote a different way"?
-
-
Happy to answer. I get these sorts of questions from my students all the time. Criminal law has the natural and probable consequences doctrine, and jurors get instructed to use their common sense to evaluate the strength of circumstantial evidence. It's actually very easy.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @CBHessick @baseballcrank and
If your argument is that a jury might not realize every time people might want to influence other people's voting and , and so we need to write a broad law that gets rid of the element so prosecutors don't have to prove it--well, that's an argument in favor of overcriminalization
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.