Why Are Judges Ruling Against Election Integrity Laws?

The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday concerns election integrity laws and judges who are determined to strike them down. According to Hans von Spakovsky, a judge, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, struck down a Texas voter ID law for the fifth time last week. 

[Federal District Court Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos’s] 2014 rebuff of the original version of the Texas law made it clear that she believes all voter ID laws are based solely on the desire to discriminate, not improve the integrity of the election process.

Now you know why the plaintiffs went shopping to her federal court to bring the statewide challenge.

In 2014, Ramos ruled that the law discriminated against minority voters – ignoring clear evidence that this is not the case. Minority turnout had actually increased in the 2013 state election, the first election held with the new ID law in place.

What makes Ramos’ latest ruling so odd is that the amended law not only followed all guidelines set out by the 5^th Circuit Court of Appeals, it also contained provisions that Ramos herself had found acceptable as an interim remedy for the November 2016 election.

Adding a new wrinkle, Ramos also ruled unacceptable a provision Texas adopted that has been part of federal law – and never challenged – since 2002.

Here’s why Ramos’ decision is likely to be reversed.

The original Texas law required voters to present a government-issued photo ID, and the state to provide a free ID to anyone who did not already have one. Ramos ruled this provision was discriminatory, and a split 5^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last year upheld her views on the discriminatory effect claim.

But the 5^th Circuit remanded the case to Ramos, saying there wasn’t sufficient evidence to support her conclusion that the legislature had a discriminatory purpose in passing the law. Most importantly, the 5^th Circuit held that, since the vast majority of Texas voters could meet the ID requirement, Ramos would have to tailor her remedy to rectify only the discriminatory effect on the very small number of voters who could not meet the ID requirement.

By throwing out the entire law, Ramos has blatantly ignored the 5^th Circuit’s directive.

The 5^th Circuit also found acceptable the section of prior Texas law that allowed “forms of identification like utility bills, bank statements, or paychecks.”

In 2016, when the litigation was remanded to Ramos, she approved an interim remedy (agreed to by the Obama Justice Department) that would allow voters who showed up at the polling place without an ID to still vote in the general election if they:

1.     Signed a declaration that they had a “reasonable impediment” that prevented them from getting the free photo ID; and

2.     Presented a “valid voter registration certificate, a certified birth certificate, a current utility bill, a bank statement, a government check, a paycheck, or any other government document that displays the voter’s name and address.”

In other words, the remedial law had a safety valve where individuals without an ID were still able to vote.

This list of documents is identical in part to a federal requirement (Section 303(b) of the Help America Vote Act) that has been in place since 2002.

That provision requires that any voter who registers to vote by mail must, the first time they vote, show state election officials an ID such as a “current and valid photo identification” or “a copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the voter.”

The voter ID law amendment adopted by the Texas Legislature this year implemented the language from the Ramos-approved interim remedy and the 2002 Help America Vote Act almost word-for-word.

Now claiming that the law as amended is discriminatory, Ramos dismissed her prior approval of these same requirements as not a “binding determination.” …

 

What Is the Covenant Path?

My Come Follow Me studies for this week took me to Psalms 100-150 in a lesson titled “Let Every Thing That Hath Breath Praise the Lord.” The following information introduced the lesson. 

The traditional Jewish name for the book of Psalms is Tehillim, a Hebrew word that means “praises.” It’s related to the exclamation hallelujah (meaning “praise Jehovah” or “praise the Lord”). If you had to choose one word to sum up the main message of the Psalms, praise would be a good choice. Some psalms contain the direct invitation to “praise ye the Lord” (see especially Psalms 146-50), and all of them can inspire worship and praise. The Psalms invite us to acknowledge the Lord’s power, His mercy, and the great things He has done. We can never repay Him for any of this, but we can praise Him. That praise might take different forms for different people – it might involve singing, praying, or bearing testimony. It often leads to a deeper commitment to the Lord and to following His teachings. Whatever “praise ye the Lord” means in your life, you can find inspiration to do it as you read and ponder the Psalms.

The scripture block teaches several principles, including (1) The Lord can comfort me in my suffering (Psalms 102-3; 116). (2) Jesus Christ fulfilled prophecies from the Psalms (Psalms 110; 118). (3) God’s word will keep me on His path (Psalm 119). (4) The Lord is more powerful than any idol (Psalms 134-36). (5) The Lord knows my heart (Psalm 139). (6) “Praise ye the Lord” (Psalms 146-50). This essay will discuss principle #3 about the scriptures helping us to stay on the covenant path (Psalm 119).

Psalm 119 contains many phrases that compare our lives to a journey back to Heavenly Father. There are words such as “walk,” “path,” “way,” “feet,” and “wander.” During my lifetime, I have traveled many paths and roads where I hoped that I would arrive at the desired destination. The scriptures and the servants of God urge us to stay on the covenant path because they know that this path leads back into the presence of God. President Russell M. Nelson gave the following counsel about the journey through life and the value of staying on the covenant path (“Living by Scriptural Guidance,” Ensign, Nov. 2000, 17). 

If our journey through life is to be successful, we need to follow divine direction. The Lord said, “Look unto me in every thought; doubt not, fear not” [Doctrine and Covenants 6:36]. And the Psalmist wrote, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path” [Psalm 119:105]….

In your journey through life, you meet many obstacles and make some mistakes. Scriptural guidance helps you to recognize error and make the necessary correction. You stop going in the wrong direction. You carefully study the scriptural road map. Then you proceed with repentance and restitution required to get on the “strait and narrow path which leads to eternal life” [2 Nephi 31:18]” (“Living by Scriptural Guidance,” Ensign, Nov. 2000, 17).

Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles also spoke about the journey through life. After teaching the Parable of the Prodigal Son, Elder Uchtdorf said that the parable is about each person living today. “The Prodigal and the Road That Leads Home,” Liahona, Nov. 2023, 86-88). 

 My beloved brothers and sisters, dear friends, like all of the Savior’s parables, this one is not just about people living long ago. It’s about you and me, today.

Who among us has not departed from the path of holiness, foolishly thinking we could find more happiness going our own self-centered way?

Who among us has not felt humbled, brokenhearted, and desperate for forgiveness and mercy?

Perhaps some may even have wondered, “Is it even possible to go back? Will I be labeled forever, rejected, and avoided by my former friends? Is it better to just stay lost? How will God react if I try to return?”

This parable gives us the answer.

Our Heavenly Father will run to us, His heart overflowing with love and compassion. He will embrace us; place a robe around our shoulders, a ring on our finger, and sandals on our feet; and proclaim, “Today we celebrate! For my child, who once was dead, has come back to life!”

Heaven will rejoice at our return.

What Are Protective Factors to Strengthen Families?

Families can be strengthened, and strong families can strengthen communities, states, and nations. According to this site, there are five protective factors for families – “characteristics or strengths of individuals, families, communities or societies that act to mitigate risks and promote positive well-being and healthy development.” Here are the five protective factors. 

1. Parental resilience: Managing stress and functioning well when faced with challenges, adversity, and trauma.

2. Social connections: Positive relationships that provide emotional, informational, instrumental and spiritual support.

3. Knowledge of parenting and child development: Understanding child development and parenting strategies that support physical, cognitive, language, social and emotional development.

4. Concrete support in times of need: Access to concrete support and services that address a family’s needs and help minimize stress caused by challenges.

5. Social and emotional competence of children: Family and child interactions that help children develop the ability to communicate clearly, recognize and regulate their emotions and establish and maintain relationships.

Is America Better Now Than Five Years Ago?

The liberty principle for this Freedom Friday is the realization that President Donald Trump is fixing America. We were living in a broken country. There were too many people living illegally in the United States. Foreign nations were taking advantage of the goodness of Americans. Republicans are concerned that the November election will follow the historical precedent that the party in power loses seats in the House and Senate and possibly power.

Victor Davis Hanson believes that we are getting an inaccurate picture. In his article published in The Daily Signal, Hanson suggests that we look at the real world and compare the current conditions with those of the Biden administration. 

Let’s start with Canada. Canada is very angry. We’re in a trade dispute. Is Canada now making a serious effort? Does it promise that it will meet its NATO commitments? It hasn’t yet, or it barely has, but it’s making progress. It better do it. Is it trying to address, in a haphazard fashion, the idea that it can just dump product, or it can have these high tariffs and run $50 billion to $80 billion tariffs with impunity, as Mexico did? No.

Our relationship with Canada is changing for the better for us. It’s changing for the better for Mexico. Do they like it? No. Why don’t they like it? Because they had a pretty good deal at our expense.

Is the border closed? Yes. Is illegal immigration plaguing us at 10,000 a day? No. How about Venezuela? Is it importing terrorism and narcotics to North America? No. We just signed a deal that will essentially allow the United States, for 100 years, to have access to 65 billion barrels of high-sulfur, thick, but very valuable Venezuelan oil. They get $19, no matter what, without spending a dime, off every barrel that the oil companies try to extract.

And if you do the math, the cost in Venezuela is not Saudi Arabia, not the United States. It’s not light sweet crude. It’s not easy. It’s a politically difficult place. It’s a geographically and climate-challenged place, and it will cost those oil companies anywhere from $30 to $40 to $50. And if oil goes below $65, it’s going to be hard to see how they make a profit. It’s good for Venezuela. That’s why they agreed to it.

But more importantly, all of South America and all of the Caribbean and all of Central America is unrecognizable from five years ago when Joe Biden entered office. There is no problem now with the Panama Canal. Cuba is on the ropes. There’s only five governments in Latin America that are anti-American. The vast majority are capitalist, democratic, pro-American.

Go to the Middle East. One of the biggest problems we’ve had the last 50 years in the Middle East, one of the biggest, the biggest, is Iran. But not just Iran, its proxies: the Houthis, Hamas, Hezbollah. There was no Lebanon. It was kidnapped by Hezbollah.

You heard the Lebanese prime minister the other day. He said, for the first chance, there’s real opportunity in Lebanon. Why? Because Hezbollah has been defanged by Israel, but more importantly, it has no money. Why? Because we have the strictest sanctions, embargoes, that we’ve ever seen on Iran.

And as Iran, as we hear, is winning the war, they’re just about kaput. They’re strangled. We talked about an Anaconda program. Their military has been degraded by about 90%, but more importantly, they have no oil. No oil is getting in. They even have gas lines in their own country. Their currency is worthless. They’re the pariah of the world….

It’s not that the war is going bad or going good. It’s that the war is irrelevant. In other words, our life goes on and Iran’s doesn’t, and time is on our side. Maybe it’s going to be six weeks. Maybe it’s going to be six months. But it cannot survive the economic sanctions that are now in place.

And the entire Middle East is starting to wake up and see that there’s a really good chance to go to a normal regional atmosphere without that pernicious, toxic government.

The Strait of Hormuz is going to be irrelevant in two or three years. Pipelines are already in progress that will bypass the Strait of Hormuz….

But when Iran is out of the question, oil prices will not just drop, I think they’ll crash. And who’s going to control most of the oil in the world? The United States, because it’s got this good deal with Venezuela, and it’s already the largest producer of natural gas.

If you look at Russia, Russia’s a shadow of its former self. If you look at NATO, it’s rearming in a way that no one had thought would ever be possible….

You add it all up, and the EU model …it’s been thoroughly repudiated….

In other words, the socialist model has failed all over the world, and it’s starting to implode. And it’s not gaining ground in the United States. It’s a last gasp of a frustrated urban elite and partly due to radical immigration.

Add it all up, and the United States is in a preeminent position. And the world today has nothing in common with the world just five years ago. That could be very bad.

But when you look systematically in a disinterested, rational fashion, and you look at the power of China vis-à-vis the United States, you look at Russia vis-à-vis the United States, you look at Latin America vis-à-vis the United States, you look at the Middle East vis-à-vis the United States, you look at Europe vis-à-vis the United States, you come up with either two conclusions, and they’re not incompatible.

No. 1, the United States is much stronger and in a much better position than those countries and regions I just mentioned.

And No. 2, whether they like us or not, they’re moving toward the United States, not because they want to necessarily, but because our system is producing spectacular growth economically, militarily, socially, culturally, and, more importantly, in the technologies to come in the future: AI, software, space exploration, satellites, bioengineering. We’re preeminent.

So, do not listen before these midterms that we’re in crisis, the loss of war: We’re in a world that is completely unrecognizable to the one five years ago. And the fact that we haven’t been able to appreciate it is largely because we’re right in the middle of the storm. We’re in the eye of the hurricane.

But the storm is passing, and it’s going to be very advantageous for the United States in the next decade.

 

 

Articles of Faith: What Do Latter-day Saints Believe About the Fall of Adam 6?

Article of Faith 2

   We believe that men will be punished for their own sins,

                    and not for Adam’s transgression.

This essay is the sixth and final one teaching about the Fall of Adam and Eve as stated in the second Article of Faith of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The first thesis discussed moral agency, or the freedom to choose good or evil. The second treatise discussed sin and punishment for sin. The third essay discussed Satan. The fourth paper discussed the creation of Adam and Eve and Satan’s great temptation. The fifth essay discussed the tree of life and the immediate result of the Fall. This thesis will discuss how the Atonement was provided for because the Fall did not come by chance, using the words of Elder James E. Talmage (The Articles of Faith [1890], 66-68).

Atonement Provided for – God did not leave His now mortal children without hope. He gave other commandments to Adam, requiring him to offer sacrifices in the name of the Only Begotten Son, and promising redemption unto him and all his descendants who would comply with the conditions prescribed. The opportunity of winning the victor’s reward by overcoming evil was explained to our parents, and they rejoiced. Adam said: “Blessed be the name of God, for because of my transgression my eyes are opened, and in this life I shall have joy, and again in the flesh I shall see God.” Eve was glad and declared: “Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient.”

The Fall came not by chance – It would be unreasonable to suppose that the transgression of Eve and Adam came as a surprise to the Creator. By His infinite fore-knowledge, God knew what would be the result of Satan’s temptation to Eve, and what Adam would do under the resulting conditions. Further, it is evident that the fall was foreseen to be a means whereby man could be brought into direct experience with both good and evil, so that of his own agency he might elect the one or the other, and thus be prepared by the experiences of a mortal probation for the exaltation provided in the beneficent plan of his creation [emphasis added]: “For behold, this is my work and my glory – to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” (Pearl of Great Price, Moses 1:39) spoke the Lord unto Moses. It was the purpose of God to place within the reach of the spirits begotten by Him in the heavens the means of individual effort, and the opportunity of winning not merely redemption from death but also salvation and even exaltation, with the powers of eternal progression and increase. Hence it was necessary that the spiritual offspring of God should leave the scenes of their primeval childhood and enter the school of mortal experience, meeting, contending with, and overcoming evil, according to their several degrees of faith and strength. Adam and Eve could never have been the parents of a mortal posterity had they not themselves become mortal; mortality was an essential element in the divine plan respecting the earth and its appointed inhabitants; and, as a means of introducing mortality, the Lord placed before the progenitors of the race a law, knowing what would follow.

Eve was fulfilling the foreseen purposes of God by the part she took in the great drama of the fall; yet she did not partake of the forbidden fruit with that object in view, but with intent to act contrary to the divine command, being deceived by the sophistries of Satan, who also, for that matter, furthered the purposes of the Creator by tempting Eve; yet his design was to thwart the Lord’s plan. We are definitely told that “he knew not the mind of God, wherefore he sought to destroy the world” (Pearl of Great Price, Moses 4:6) [Emphasis added]. Yet his diabolical effort, far from being the initiatory step toward destruction, contributed to the plan of man’s eternal progression. Adam’s part in the great event was essentially different from that of his wife; he was not deceived; on the contrary he deliberately decided to do as Eve desired, that he might carry out the purposes of his Maker with respect to the race of men, whose first patriarch he was ordained to be.

Even the transgressions of men may be turned to the accomplishment of high purposes. The sacrificial death of Christ was ordained from before the foundation of the world, yet Judas who betrayed, and the Jews who brought about the crucifixion of the Son of God, are nonetheless guilty of the awful crime.

It has become a common practice with mankind to heap reproaches upon the progenitors of the family, and to picture the supposedly blessed state in which we would be living but for the fall; whereas our first parents are entitled to our deepest gratitude for their legacy to posterity – the means of winning title to glory, exaltation, and eternal lives. But for the opportunity thus given, the spirits of God’s offspring would have remained forever in a state of innocent childhood, sinless through no effort of their own; negatively saved, not form sin, but from the opportunity of meeting sin; incapable of winning the honors of victory because prevented from taking part in the conflict. As it is, they are heirs to the birthright of Adam’s descendants – mortality, with its immeasurable possibilities and its God-given freedom of action. From Father Adam we have inherited all the ills to which flesh is heir; but such are necessarily incident to a knowledge of good and evil, by the proper use of which knowledge man may become even as the Gods.

 

Why Does DEI Still Have Life?

The federal government banned “diversity, equity, and inclusion” or DEI, and public opinion of it has dropped. However, elite educational institutions still have it. Jarrett Stepman discussed the situation in his article published in The Daily Signal. 

DEI may be crumbling in the federal government and waning in the public esteem, but it is still going strong in elite educational institutions despite popular and legal headwinds against it.

Aaron Sibarium at The Washington Free Beacon dropped a report on Monday about how one prestigious law school journal often made race a deciding factor in the submissions it would accept.

Sibarium wrote that the prestigious California Law Review, the University of California at Berkeley School of Law’s top journal, brings on editors aggressively dedicated to promoting “diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

This group of editors used an increasingly common set of procedures that let it create more racial diversity without directly saying, “Whites need not apply.”

The Free Beacon reported that it “reviewed 14 applications for the committee submitted between 2023 and 2026,” as well as internal announcements about which applications were ultimately accepted.

The pattern that emerged was clear.

“The documents offer a window into how editors at a top law review … are using personal statements to bypass bans on affirmative action, giving race as much weight or more than what one former committee member, Clemencia Garcia-Kasimirowski, dubbed ‘seemingly objective’ standards.”

One of the members of the California Law Review’s selection committee was former Politico Deputy Director Maya Parthasarathy, who came aboard in 2025.

Parthasarathy, according to the report, had previously used her position at Politico to aggressively promote DEI.

First, Parthasarathy dropped grade considerations for new hires, then she created a “holistic” review for new job applicants which apparently included an editing test. But even that test didn’t seem to be too important to the eventual hiring decision.

“For candidates on the borderline of a passing score on our test, we considered strengths they showed in other parts of their applications, and experiences they would bring to the table,” Parthasarathy wrote in her application to the California Law Review admissions committee, “At the end of my tenure at Politico, our team had grown from just one person of color – me – to fifty percent hires from underrepresented backgrounds.”

So, the objective hiring measures were effectively dropped. Then there was a flood of people hired from “underrepresented backgrounds.”

The thinly disguised form of racial hiring Parthasarathy described became ubiquitous in media, in corporate America, in law firms, and certainly in academia before the “vibe shift” and President Donald Trump’s election in 2024.

Practically every elite institution of every type grabbed hold of the “racial reckoning” and committed to hiring practices of dubious legal merit. But many of them got cold feet when the Department of Justice made it clear they would begin to enforce civil rights laws against them. However, as we’ve seen in many such cases, higher education just can’t give up what’s become its central reason for being.

It has shown a remarkable willingness to throw away notions of merit and credibility to continue the DEI racket, even in the face of legal threats.

And that was clearly the case at the California Law Review.

It wasn’t just one submissions editor who perfected the art of racist, “antiracist” dog-whistling to bring in artificially created diversity.

Previously mentioned Garcia-Kasimirowski blasted standardized testing as “created by a eugenicist” and denounced large scale lectures as “proven to disadvantage people of color.”

Two more editors explicitly said, according to Sibarium, that they joined the submission committee so they could boost Native American applicants.

One editor pledged that she would ensure that “students like the girl from my tribe can look to law review journals and feel represented.”

The submissions process was heavily skewed toward the personal statement, which, Sibarium noted, was often a deciding factor in whether an applicant was accepted or not. And the personal statements that were most likely to be accepted were clearly weighted toward students who demonstrated how they would fit the goals of DEI.

When you see story after media story complaining about how the Trump education department is waging a war on “education,” or how conservatives want to defund “research,” think of this report.

Our nation’s top schools have replaced merit with the ultimately shallow but ruthlessly discriminatory demands of DEI. This report on the California Law Review doesn’t shock me. What would shock me at this point is if any top law review didn’t use DEI in some way…..

It’s an important lesson to keep in mind going forward. They’ll never give it up, but they’ll keep you down if you don’t have the right skin color and don’t bow to the same gods of DEI that they do.

Who Is Dolly Parton?

My VIP for this week is Dolly Parton. She was born in a one-room cabin in January 1946 in Tennessee, the fourth of twelve children. The family later moved to a two-room cabin and a farm. Dolly’s father was illiterate and worked first as a sharecropper and then in construction. Her mother cared for the large family and shared musical talents with her children. Dolly described her family as being “dirt poor.”

Dolly wrote her first song at age six and began to perform in public at age ten. She became a singer-songwriter, actress, businesswoman, and philanthropist. She was known as the “Queen of Country.” She wrote more than 3,000 songs and sold more than 100 million records. Her music endures with hit songs like Jolene, Coat of Many Colors, 9 to 5, and I Will Always Love You. She starred in films, such as 9 to 5 and Steel Magnolias. In her six-decade career, she earned 11 Grammy’s and multiple Hall of Fame inductions.

Dolly was also a philanthropist. She founded Dollywood. She launched the Imagination Library and provided millions of free books to children worldwide. She received multiple humanitarian honors before her death last week.

Dolly was married but never had children of her own. Therefore, she treated her nieces and nephews as her own and loved children everywhere.

Dolly was a successful businesswoman, and she used her great wealth to help people who were less fortunate.

I chose Dolly as my VIP for this week for two reasons: (1) She is all over the news this week.

(2) Her life shows that a person can start life with almost nothing and still become successful in American by working hard and developing talents.