New Law Grants Letitia James 'Unprecedented Power' Over 2024 Election

New York Attorney General Letitia James has gained significant recognition as a relentless legal force, particularly targeting conservative causes and, most notably, former President Donald Trump.

However, few took notice when a 2022 law, slated to take effect just months before the upcoming presidential election, granted James what one election lawyer described as “unprecedented power.” This was highlighted in an Op-Ed earlier this week.

To put it simply: brace yourselves, New Yorkers, especially if you reside in a competitive congressional district.

The controversy centers around the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York, as reported by Fox News. This legislation, signed by Governor Kathy Hochul in 2022, goes into effect this Sunday.

A key provision of the law requires that any changes to the election process must receive preclearance from either the attorney general or a specially designated court under the new statute.

“Jurisdictions can fall under the new rule’s shadow for multiple reasons — including arrest rates for citizens in ‘protected classes,’” explained attorney Joseph T. Burns, who specializes in electoral law and has a background in Republican politics, in his New York Post Op-Ed published Sunday.

Surprisingly, these actions could stem from seemingly routine matters.

“If a poll site needs to be moved or a voter list must be culled to remove deceased residents, that jurisdiction’s Board of Elections will have to seek AG approval first,” Burns noted. “More troubling, the law includes a provision that allows the AG to expand the list of local election board functions that will require preclearance.”

In New York, elections are typically administered by bipartisan boards, where both major political parties are equally represented. However, due to this preclearance requirement, the attorney general, known for suing the National Rifle Association and Trump Organization for political reasons, is granted “unprecedented power over election processes in some of the most hotly contested congressional districts in the nation, including those on Long Island and in the Hudson Valley,” Burns remarked.

“Our elections — and the public’s faith in them — will not be improved by the AG’s meddling,” he argued, comparing the law’s impact to “a political earthquake.”

“Nobody is really talking about it or what a big effect it’s going to have,” Burns told Fox News over the phone.

“It’s fascinating because, while New York already has its share of issues with elections, this stands out as particularly concerning. And it’s clearly a significant power grab by the attorney general as well.”

The jurisdictions affected by this new rule extend beyond New York City and Long Island. Counties in upstate New York like Erie, Monroe, Onondaga, and Albany are also covered.

Unlike preclearance rules that applied to southern states with histories of voter suppression during the Jim Crow era, the criteria that determine which counties are "covered entities" are far less dramatic.

For example, take Erie County, home to Buffalo. It’s under the law’s scope due to a court order related to a 14th Amendment issue from a decade ago.

“You might think, ‘This sounds ominous. They must be disenfranchising a minority group,’” Burns said. “‘But no, not at all. What actually happened was the county executive and the county legislature couldn’t agree on a redistricting plan,’” he explained. “That’s the kind of situation that can put a local government under preclearance.”

Burns emphasizes that the real concern is the erosion of trust in the election system, especially with swing districts now subject to preclearance under this law.

“This isn’t just bad policy; it undermines the bipartisan structure of the boards of elections. Sure, they’re not perfect and can be inefficient,” he acknowledged.

“But given the current climate, where election integrity is such a major concern, what could be better than having both parties invested in ensuring elections run smoothly and fairly? Now, a partisan elected official steps in with veto power over our boards of elections.”

And it’s not just any partisan official — it’s someone who has been at the forefront of the Democrats’ aggressive legal strategy. If this doesn’t raise alarm, it certainly should.