Yesterday, this blog addressed the EAC's purpose and its duty to the states. The DOJ is responsible for representing the EAC in legal matters, or at least that is the way it is supposed to work. The National Review released an article describing the hearing that occurred yesterday where that behavior was as far away from that expectation as possible.

As the presidential primaries are well underway, the U.S. Department of Justice continues to attempt to block measures designed to keep non-citizen voters from being included in our elections. 

In the days since Justice Scalia's untimely passing, pundits and scholars have been using the history of Supreme Court nominations and confirmations to make their chosen political point - either that the Senate should or should not confirm a Supreme Court nominee in an Election Year.  

Despite the large margin by which Sen. Bernie Sanders defeated Secretary Hillary Clinton in the New Hampshire primary, she leaves the state with 15 delegates, half the state's total. The Democratic National Committee’s delegate allocation system is strange to say the least:

The practice of the Senate not confirming Supreme Court nominees in an Election Year has not been made up by Republicans in response to Justice Scalia's untimely passing.  It is a rule first outlined by the Democrat poised to replace Sen. Harry Reid as Minority Leader.  

The RNLA mourns the sudden passing of Justice Antonin Scalia, along with the rest of the country.  His passing leaves a vacancy on the Supreme Court, and though Justice Scalia can never truly be replaced, a justice to succeed him will be nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.  The justice to succeed Justice Scalia should not be nominated by this President and confirmed by this Senate, however.

While the RNLA mourns the loss of Justice Antonin Scalia, the importance of finding the right successor, especially in a presidential election year is paramount.  In a press release yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell stated:

In last night's Democratic presidential debate, Sen. Bernie Sanders reiterated what has become one of the themes of his campaign: 

Bernie Sanders is not only attacking our freedom of speech but he is proposing to do so in a manner that directly contradicts the most basic of judicial tenets. Justices cannot bind themselves to decide a case before it is before them. This is a basic tenet of judicial ethics.

Once again, the chicken little vote fraud deniers went crazy in advance of New Hampshire's primary yesterday.  As this article full of misinformationdetails on the reaction on the left on having to show ID: