ACRU Policy Board Member Col. Allen B. West expresses ACRU’s support for Texas lawsuit demanding state legislative authority over election protocols be upheld
“The lawsuit filed by Texas against Michigan, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin is needed to protect the American electoral process from executive and judicial actions that usurp the constitutional powers of state legislators. ACRU encourages principled leaders across the country to join Texas in the fight against assaults on election integrity and the Constitution.”
Honestly conducted elections, with each American’s vote counting once, is the foundation of a nation whose Constitution begins “We the People…”
The government derives its legitimacy from free and fair elections and is bound by them. Vote fraud cuts at the very heart of American freedom. When an illegal vote is cast and counted, it cancels out the legal vote of a lawful citizen. (Watch the undercover videos).
In recent years, close elections and news of vote fraud have awakened Americans to the importance of protecting the integrity of the ballot box.
This site is a one-stop shop about voting requirements in every state, current state efforts to strengthen ballot integrity and the push-back from the Left.
Get involved — help prevent vote fraud from stealing your most precious civil right!
ACRU is dedicated to protecting seniors from vote fraud. Through our Protect Elderly Votes project, we created “Stranger Danger” to warn seniors and those caring for them to take steps to protect their ballots. If you suspect vote fraud, call ACRU’s Vote Fraud Hotline at 877-730-ACRU (2278). NEVER LET A STRANGER TOUCH YOUR BALLOT!
Listen to our new radio ads to learn more.
ACRU Commentary
Latest Election News
Arizona Argues Its Case at Supreme Court
Arizona Attorney General Thomas C. Horne told the Supreme Court on Monday that states carry the "burden" of determining voter eligibility and they can demand residents prove their citizenship before registering to vote. Conservative-leaning Justice Antonin Scalia seemed to agree with Arizona, saying a sworn oath of citizenship "is not proof at all." Arizona and its supporters -- including other states with plans for similar laws -- say a signature isn't enough to combat voter fraud. And they argue the federal voting-rights law doesn't say that states can't impose additional citizenship requirements.
Supreme Court Hears Arizona Voter ID Case
With the fate of a crucial provision of the Voting Rights Act hanging in the balance, the Supreme Court hears another case challenging the right of a state to put in place new voting requirements Monday. At stake in the case--Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc.-- is whether or not an Arizona law requiring Arizonans to show proof of citizenship at the voting booth will be upheld.
Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona
Arizona voters passed a law in 2004 "to combat voter fraud by requiring voters to present proof of citizenship when they register to vote and to present identification when they vote on election day." The [...]
Iowa Photo ID Bill Moves Out of House Committee
DES MOINES (AP) -- House Republicans moved forward on Feb. 28 with a proposal that would require Iowa voters to show photo identification at polling places. Lawmakers in the House State Government Committee approved the legislation in a 12-8 vote split along party lines. The measure is backed by Secretary of State Matt Schultz, who has filed identical bills in the House and Senate.
Court Revisits Voting Rights Act; Liberals Flip Out
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on a question not touched for nearly 50 years - namely, the question of whether parts of the landmark Voting Rights Act (VRA) of 1965 still stand the test of constitutionality, and specifically a section that has long plagued states' rights advocates. Unfortunately for liberals, who view the VRA as one of their landmark legislative achievements, the answer to that question may well be "no," as many court analysts seem to have viewed the oral arguments in the case as either an unadulterated disaster for the government, or at least as a strong sign that a majority of the court is willing to consider striking down at least part of the act.
PDF Download: Defending Honest Elections in America
