Posted on 01/17/2012 3:31:51 PM PST by Quicksilver
A federal appeals court in Virginia today denied an emergency request by Republican presidential hopefuls Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich to be placed on the ballot for the Virginia primary.
After failing to get the required 10,000 signatures necessary to be placed on the ballot, the two candidates argued that Virginia’s strict ballot law was unconstitutional.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit agreed with a lower court and ruled today that the candidates had waited too long to file their suit.
The court ruled unanimously that Perry and the other candidates “had every opportunity to challenge the various Virginia ballot requirements at a time when the challenge would not have created the disruption that this last-minute lawsuit has.”
The court said that if it had ruled in favor of Perry, then it would encourage other candidates for president “who knew the requirements and failed to satisfy them to seek at a tardy and belated hour to change the rules of the game.”
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Romney has already been annointed. So the primaries are useless.
If Rick’s last name was Lautenberg he could get on the ballot the week before the election.
If his last name was Carnahan he could win without his name on the ballot.
Of course he’d need to be a Democrat first.
Another victory for States’ Rights in a Federal Court!
I bet Rick Perry, being a supporter of States’ Rights, is delighted with this ruling.
We need a much better selection system ~
You do realize this is an act of war against the citizens.
Super tuesday is march 6. I bet it will be decided before then anyhow, and I live in Va.
If the first round of primaries/cauci are so important to the GOP, why are they held in states that rarely go GOP in the general election, at least in recent years? How does that make sense? And yes, Va. went Obama last time as well.
Freegards
Why are you opposed to a state like Texas or South Carolina passing Voter ID laws, or Virginia establishing primary election standards they the legislature believes is best for the people of Virginia.
Do you want the Federal Courts to overturn election laws in Texas, S Carolina and Virginia.
Now that we've gotten through the peaceful introduction ~ let me put it this way, I've been the guy who for YEARS has repetitively notified folks here and on other sites on the net about the Indiana victory at the USSC regarding photo IDs for voting.
Now you accuse me of being against Photo IDs for voting?
Go soak your head for a very, very long time.
Now if the last name of the party filing the lawsuit had a (D) after their name, kind of like 0dumb0shit, he could wait until the 11th hour, 59th minute to file a lawsuit and the liberal court would immediately file an injunction against the state, not to proceed with the election. But an (R) after the name, and all of a sudden the courts are in favor of upholding the state. Bastards!
“You do realize this is an act of war against the citizens.”
Let me get this straight.
You are saying that when a Federal Court refuses to overturn a law passed by the Virginia Legislature, that it is an act of war?
From reading your posts in the past, I thought that you advocated States’s Rights.
Why are you now opposed to States’ Rights?
Regarding cheating, and that's what your boy did, he cheated, the Constitution does not empower cheaters when we catch them.
Before this is over you will see yourself, your boy Romney, Mullins and Bolling inside a federal prison looking out.
You lose your Republican credentials by engaging in any sort of fraud involving the way elections, or the materials related to elections are governed.
Then there are the cheaters, and why am I not surprised at all to find the guy from Bain CHEATING?
That's not free enterprise or capitalism ~ that's CONVERSION.
I see. You oppose a Federal,Court interfering with decisions of the Indiana legislature, but you want an Activist Federal Judge to interfere with decisions of the Virginia legislature?
If you’re the best Mitt’s got he’s going to lose everything.
“There are no state’s rights at stake here ~ the office about which the issue forms is a FEDERAL OFFICE.”
So therefore, the Federal Government and Federal Courts should be able to dictate to Texas and South Carolina that they cannot require a picture ID to vote in a Fedeal Office.
I wonder why ABC covered this today when the judge ruled on this last week....................I find that very odd, very odd indeed
“If you’re the best Mitt’s got he’s going to lose everything.”
You will not find a post of mine which is supportive of Mitt Romney.
However, you will find that I do advocate States’ Rights.
The fact of the matter is that the Virginia legislature passed a law and litigants from out of state ran to a Federal Court demanding that Activist Judges overturn the will of the people of Virginia.
The Federal Court made the right decision.
I must say, I enjoyed yalls little tiff here.
It’s interesting how this website format is able to take two people who both are against a RINO like Romney and both presumably support States Rights in principle, and get them at each other’s throats.
I can’t imagine Axelrod coming up with a more effective tool.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.