The US Supreme Court rejected a review submitted by the Democratic Party in the state of Ohio to impose measures to prevent supporters of the Republican presidential candidate, Donald Trump, from taking actions that could lead to voter intimidation on Election Day.
This judicial battle followed by the entire country, due to its repercussions on the electoral process; It erupted due to the repeated calls made by the controversial billionaire to his supporters, to come down on voting day in order to observe the proper conduct of the electoral process, which he confirmed was “rigged” in advance.
Fearing that Trump's call would intimidate opponents of his voters, especially those belonging to minorities, the Ohio Democratic Party initiated an urgent judicial review before a federal court, requesting the imposition of measures to prevent voter intimidation, which the latter responded to.
Indeed, last Friday, Federal Judge James Gowen issued a decision prohibiting Trump supporters from carrying out a set of practices such as following, questioning, or photographing voters or their cars, but the Trump campaign quickly responded by appealing to an appeals court in Cincinnati.
And the court announced that it accepted the appeal, justifying its reversal of the federal judge's ruling, that the Democrats did not provide sufficient evidence of the validity of their concerns.
Faced with this ruling, the Democrats did not find any alternative but to resort to the Supreme Court in Washington, DC, where they presented yesterday (Monday) an urgent review to overturn the ruling of the Court of Appeal and support the decision of Judge Gwin, which was rejected by the eight Supreme Court judges.
The final ruling of the Supreme Court, which does not accept any method of review, represents a victory for the Trump camp, knowing that the highest judicial body in the country is generally reluctant to interfere in the course of the elections, such a short time before it begins.
The court justified its decision by saying that Ohio already has laws prohibiting electoral intimidation.
AFP (Washington)