Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Surpreme Court Strikes Down AZ Voter Law
Surpreme Court ^ | 6/17/13

Posted on 06/17/2013 7:30:44 AM PDT by ConservativeMan55

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-303 next last
To: Breto
Yes, Kim Kardashian is loosing weight....

Just like her, to be throwing that weight at others.

51 posted on 06/17/2013 7:45:56 AM PDT by going hot (Happiness is a momma deuce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: headstamp 2

‘So basically anybody can vote in our elections now.’

And...you can vote as many times as you want to. The only limitation is the number of precincts that you can access on voting day. Thank God for early, late, internet, post-funeral, and pre-birth voting. That may just cover it all.


52 posted on 06/17/2013 7:46:00 AM PDT by Delta Dawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55
Surpreme Court Strikes Down AZ Voter Law

Obama Controlled Court Strikes Down AZ Voter Law


53 posted on 06/17/2013 7:46:12 AM PDT by Iron Munro (Obama-Ville - Land of The Free Stuff, Home of the Enslaved)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55
If/when the amnesty bill is passed, we can kiss our Republic goodbye.

America was a great experiment while it lasted...

Or is CWII just over the horizon?

5.56mm

54 posted on 06/17/2013 7:46:54 AM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

This latest display of Federal tyranny was made possible by the 17th amendment. Thank you 17th amendment.


55 posted on 06/17/2013 7:47:59 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

So Arizona has a state form and a federal form.

Here’s a simple case of ‘probably cause perjury.’

If the voter in the federal election is not registered with for the state election and subsequently votes in a federal election that vote is suspect and the voter should be investigated...AFTER...the federal elections on the grounds of probable voter fraud.

I know in Ohio we sign the book before voting. Arizona would need to compare or create a new voter sign-in that indicates which type of election the voter is registered for. Be it State or Federal. AND all voting forms need to be disbursed that reflect just each case.


56 posted on 06/17/2013 7:48:54 AM PDT by EBH (The government that sits in Washington, D.C. is not the United States government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
Concur. KEY CLAUSE, PEOPLE, STOP THE PANIC!!!
"That alternative means of enforcing its constitutional power to determine voting qualifications remains open to Arizona here. Should the EAC reject or decline to act on a renewed request, Arizona would have the opportunity to establish in a reviewing court that a mere oath will not suffice to effectuate its citizenship requirements." [emphasis added]
I think this is a signal from at a minimum Scalia that once the NVRA process is followed, there will be a sympathetic SCOTUS majority.
57 posted on 06/17/2013 7:49:41 AM PDT by NonValueAdded (Unindicted Co-conspirators: The Mainstream Media)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded
And how many others think the same, but don't have the guts to say it.
REVOLUTION NOW!
58 posted on 06/17/2013 7:49:58 AM PDT by Yosemitest (It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

Just what does the NSA have on the SCOTUS?


59 posted on 06/17/2013 7:50:15 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

Yes indeed, “O”s Regime has infected every facet and level of the Federal Gubment.


60 posted on 06/17/2013 7:50:27 AM PDT by thegrump
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rennes Templar

“Any good news today, anywhere?”

Yes, there is good news. Picked up my son at the airport and while here, he filled material Grow Bags full of potting soil mix out of a huge bag of the stuff that was so heavy I couldn’t manage the big bag myself. Now, I have three 5 gallon Grow Bags full of potting soil mix and can plant food plants in those Grow Bags.

I have gone from bad news of government I can’t do anything about, to appreciating three Grow Bags full of potting soil mix. Have to find my joy wherever it is and government isn’t it.


61 posted on 06/17/2013 7:50:33 AM PDT by Marcella (Prepping can save your life today. I am a Christian, not a Muslim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Isn’t the upcoming Texas Voter Rights case before the Supreme court going to make a big difference whether the Federal government has a say in how states conduct elections?


62 posted on 06/17/2013 7:50:44 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: M Kehoe

I hope we get a years waring before the unpleasantness starts, I need that long to get into shape.


63 posted on 06/17/2013 7:51:41 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan

It’s all on the “honor system.” You know, all those “honest, hardworking” illegals who broke the law to come here.


64 posted on 06/17/2013 7:52:06 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

Federal VOting Act uses the word “accept” in the language, i.e. accept the filled out Fed form without having to prove citizenship.. The Fed form must be accepted with a mere promise of being a citizen under penalty of perjury. Therefore, with the Fed law written as it is AZ state law is preempted here. To me that means the Federal Voting Rights Act will have to be amended to address this problem.This is just what I got out of this ruling. We are wide open now.
It makes me wonder if this will put more pressure on feet-dragging with regards to ENFORCE/DEPORT on the right. Or if we can get this VRA garbage rewritten.Read it and weep.


65 posted on 06/17/2013 7:52:13 AM PDT by magna carta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: central_va
Just what does the NSA have on the SCOTUS?

Valid point. Roberts isn't the only one they've dug up dirt on. This administration is blackmailing as many Justices as possible.

66 posted on 06/17/2013 7:53:19 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

There is also the Alabama case as well.


67 posted on 06/17/2013 7:53:32 AM PDT by Perdogg (Sen Ted Cruz, Sen Mike Lee, and Sen Rand Paul are my adoptive Senators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

People are over-reacting. The decision says a federal registration form must be used IN CONJUNCTION WITH DOCUMENTARY PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP, under perjury penalty. The real problem is states like Crapachusetts which gladly provide illegals with fake proof of citizenship.


68 posted on 06/17/2013 7:53:56 AM PDT by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

More proof for what I’ve been saying for some time: Scalia simply doesn’t believe in republican self-government.


69 posted on 06/17/2013 7:56:35 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (John Boehner and the Republican Party: A wholly-owned subsidiary of Democrats, Inc.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

What these black-robed government tyrants have done is unconstitutional. Where does it say in the U.S. Constitution that foreigners can vote in our elections? Where? Do these lowlifes even know what the U.S. Constitution is?


70 posted on 06/17/2013 7:58:54 AM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (23,116,441 households on Food Stamps! Now that's what I call HISTORICAL!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

So SCOTUS is basically anti-Constitution now. First the cowards uphold Obozocare, and now they openly support lawlessness in the voting arena. Traitors in the ranks of the SC just about seals it for America.

A push to give Obama two more terms is coming very very soon. Watch for it.


71 posted on 06/17/2013 7:59:17 AM PDT by Mich Patriot (PITCH BLACK is the new "transparent")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: headstamp 2
So basically anybody can vote in our elections now.

The Republic is finished.

Don't worry about AMNESTY! They can all vote now anyhow. "C'mon down! Vote early, vote often. Get your "Free" whatever as you exit the polling place!" What Republic? We are a Democracy with two wolves and a lamb deciding on what to have for dinner.

72 posted on 06/17/2013 7:59:32 AM PDT by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Have not read the opinion, but sounds like a simple Supremacy Clause and preemption decision, and is probably right.


73 posted on 06/17/2013 8:00:09 AM PDT by NCLaw441
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan

#25 . . . “What’s to stop anyone in the world from voting wherever and whenever he chooses?” I think we saw the answer to that in 2012.


74 posted on 06/17/2013 8:00:12 AM PDT by rhubarbk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan

Don’t go Kaczynski yet.


75 posted on 06/17/2013 8:00:45 AM PDT by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Safrguns

[[Proof of that which is already a requirement is a “how”. not a who.

Something really smells here.]]

What the hell? This is another case of “It depends what “IS’ IS”

What hte hell other ocutnry can an ILLEGAL Alien vote in and be protected by their ‘powers that be’?

We might as well count the traitor John Roberts as a compelte loss to the right- We now have a mjority left supreme court that uis goign to IGNORE the cosntitution


76 posted on 06/17/2013 8:00:49 AM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Not how I read it.

They only need to aver (swear) they are citizens under penalty of perjury. That’s the Federal Form law/usage.

Arizona requires proof of citizenship for state level elections. They can continue to do so at state level, but for federal elections a simple attest to citizenship is the law.

So if Arizona wants to go after voter fraud, they are going to have to make the effort post election to investigate under probable cause those who are not registered to vote in state elections, but registered to vote in federal elections.


77 posted on 06/17/2013 8:01:27 AM PDT by EBH (The government that sits in Washington, D.C. is not the United States government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

Why?


78 posted on 06/17/2013 8:01:32 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, which doesn't require such documentation, trumps Arizona's Proposition 200 passed in 2004.

Boehner needs to introduce a bill in the House which repeals or revises the 1993 National Voter Registration Act. Likelihood of that? Nill.

79 posted on 06/17/2013 8:02:16 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55; All
REMEBER THIS the next time you hear some loser lament: "Well, America voted for this ..."

No, America didn't vote for "this." "This" cheated to win. HAVE MORE FAITH IN YOUR FELLOW AMERICANS, PEOPLE. A huge part of the left's fraudulent victory is that it has hurt American morale so deeply; it has good, productive (if gullible) Americans holding each other in contempt on the false pretense of being stupid enough to "vote for this -- not me, but all you other jerks, Americans are so stupid to have voted for this!" So it has Americans hating each other for FALSE reasons.

Americans who believe that "most Americans" are idiot dweebs and parasites, are themselves the bigger, stupider, problem. As long as you, Rush Limbaugh or any other self-described patriot or conservative, believes that the majority of your fellow countrymen are stupid losers, then YOU are the problem.

This crap about allowing illegals to vote just proves more and more that indeed, WE are the majority, that Obama and liberalism is the minority, that most Americans have their heads on straight -- if they didn't, liberals wouldn't have to cheat to win.

80 posted on 06/17/2013 8:02:40 AM PDT by Finny (Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. -- Psalm 119:105)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

[[With the integrity of the nation’s form of government on the line, these guys are debating the minutia. Alice in Wonderland. ]]

Yes, they are deabtign what “IS is” they are pullign a clniton on the American people- and they are countign on the citizens beign too stupid to realize they are beign bamboozled-

When we don’t even have a supreme court to protect us agaisnt a rogue govenrment any longer, the republic is finished- done, kapoot- the surpeme court was suppsoed to be our last lien of defence agaisnt tyraynny, but now even that is lost to us-


81 posted on 06/17/2013 8:03:35 AM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

The conflict here seems to be that federal law simply states that the person affirm “under threat of persecution” that they are or are not a citizen. The Arizona law takes the extra step of rejecting any registration that does not accompany proof of citizenry, which is seen as an undue burden.


82 posted on 06/17/2013 8:04:21 AM PDT by struggle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE
All we need to do is lose the House. Then it is all over, but the shouting!!!!

Rats in the house, forever!!!!

I hate to say this, but do you really see any Conservatives in the House, I believe the House is already gone. To those who think it is over are right,ONLY, if we choose to go down without a fight and please don't confuse the word fight with a Political fight. We are already beyond that.

83 posted on 06/17/2013 8:04:27 AM PDT by thegrump
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: SCHROLL

I think that’s how it would have to be done. Only thing is, you have to have proof of ineligibility. You could require them to show proof of eligibility in order to vote in the state and if they didn’t provide proof of eligibility you could deny them the ability to register for a STATE election, but you still wouldn’t have any proof of ineligibility to justify disallowing them to vote in federal elections. Of course, that would mean there would have to be 2 voter registration systems in each state - one for state and local elections and another for federal elections.

I wonder if some states can only recognize the federal election results of another state if the other state has minimum fraud prevention measures in place. Or maybe the other states need to file lawsuits against states where fraud is known to be rampant - suing those states of willful neglect resulting in the defrauding of all the other states.

We have to do something, or the country is lost.


84 posted on 06/17/2013 8:05:02 AM PDT by butterdezillion (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

If I was running Arizona, my response would be to stop ALL vetting of voters. After all, if you can’t stop the illegals from voting early and often, why stop the citizens from voting early and often? SCOTUS just guaranteed fraudulent elections, so why go through with the charade?


85 posted on 06/17/2013 8:05:50 AM PDT by piytar (The predator-class is furious that their prey are shooting back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion

“We have to do something, or the country is lost.”

check out my prayer...


86 posted on 06/17/2013 8:08:14 AM PDT by max americana (fired liberals in our company after the election, & laughed while they cried (true story))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded
(c) Arizona is correct that the Elections Clause empowers Congress to regulate how federal elections are held, but not who may vote in them. The latter is the province of the States. See U. S. Const., Art. I, §2, cl. 1; Amdt. 17. It would raise serious constitutional doubts if a federal statute precluded a State from obtaining the information necessary to enforce its voter qualifications. The NVRA can be read to avoid such a conflict, however. Section 1973gg–7(b)(1) permits the EAC to include on the Federal Form information “necessary to enable the appropriate State election official to assess the eligibility of the applicant.” That validly conferred discretionary executive authority is properly exercised (as the Government has proposed) to require the inclusion of Arizona’s concrete-evidence requirement if such evidence is necessary to enable Arizona to enforce its citizenship qualification.

The NVRA permits a State to request the EAC to include state -specific instructions on the Federal Form, see 42 U. S. C. §1973gg–7(a)(2), and a State may challenge the EAC’s rejection of that request (or failure to act on it) in a suit under the Administrative Procedure Act. That alternative means of enforcing its constitutional power to determine voting qualifications remains open to Arizona here.

Should the EAC reject or decline to act on a renewed request, Arizona would have the opportunity to establish in a reviewing court that a mere oath will not suffice to effectuate its citizenship requirement and that the EAC is therefore under a nondiscretionary duty to include Arizona’s concrete-evidence requirement on the Federal Form.

87 posted on 06/17/2013 8:09:06 AM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: skeeter
Who wrote the majority opinion and how in the world did they justify it?

Scalia, and the rationale is federal preemption: Congress in the Motor Voter Act said that states "must accept" federal registration forms (which require a sworn statement that the voter is a citizen, but no other proof), so states cannot (under the Supremacy Clause) contradict the federal law.

88 posted on 06/17/2013 8:09:08 AM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

Well, AZ can request a change to the form. Sure Holder will get right on with complying with that request...


89 posted on 06/17/2013 8:09:21 AM PDT by piytar (The predator-class is furious that their prey are shooting back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

If it is okay to cheat, it is not cheating. We vote as many times as necessary too.


90 posted on 06/17/2013 8:11:25 AM PDT by ecomcon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

“Stinks to high heaven..”

When the dicktator has access to all your personal communications there is plenty of opportunity for black mail. This is why character matters. Anyone with something to hide is at risk for coercion.


91 posted on 06/17/2013 8:11:28 AM PDT by No Socialist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded
Yes, item (c) in the syllabus leaves the door open for Arizona to correct the shortcoming and still accomplish their aim. Like I said, a highly technical decision supporting the Rule of Law without undermining Arizona’s ultimate aim. This is not the total fail it appears to be at first blush.

Thank you. It's good to see a realist on this thread among the many hysterical cynics.

92 posted on 06/17/2013 8:12:02 AM PDT by Finny (Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. -- Psalm 119:105)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: piytar

... and you have the hint from Scalia that when AZ challenges Holder, it will ultimately win.

It’s a chess match. SCOTUS is following the Rule of Law and not simply acting as a legislature - something we decidedly don’t want them to do. This is a technical setback, that’s all. It is check, not checkmate.


93 posted on 06/17/2013 8:12:18 AM PDT by NonValueAdded (Unindicted Co-conspirators: The Mainstream Media)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan

[[I’m just about ready to build a cabin in the woods somewhere and tell the world to f off!]]

Just make sure you follow all the guidelines and beurocracy and red tape while builiding it otherwisde you’ll be fined-

It USED TO BE that a person could go compeltely off grid and never be forced to do anything- or to purchase anything- a person coudll ive entirely off the land, never pay another tax in their lifetime, never pay another dime for ANYTHING if they so chose to- never be forced to purchase anything-

Then alogn came the TRAITOR John Roberts saying it was legal for our govnerment to FORCE us to purchase soemthing because, get this, ‘it’s not the supreme court’s job to protect the peopel from their own choices’ (Apparently the traitor will then be ok with a republican president coming along and declarign that NO man shall EVER asgain have the right to demand that any citizen purchase anything agaisnt hteir will’ and to make that a permanent law which can never be undone- Yeah I didn’t htink so either=- the Traiter John Roberts will probably come alogn and overturn suchg a law then declarign he’s doign so to protect the citizens)

Now we have the Supreme court tellign states they have no right to try to prevent ILLEGAL votes? Whjat next? Will the Traitor John Roberts then declare states have no right tryign to prevent ILLEGALS from raping? Murdering? Stealing? By declarign hte states may saty ‘how’ citizens are not allowed to commit crimes, but it may not say “Who’ is to be boudn by state laws?

We have a bunch of court jesters presiding over us i nthe supreme court


94 posted on 06/17/2013 8:12:49 AM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Scalia simply doesn’t believe in republican self-government.

Poppycock. He just applies the law to his decisions. The culprit isn't Scalia, it is the 1993 National Voter Registration Act (aka Motor Voter).

95 posted on 06/17/2013 8:13:04 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

Perhaps this is the way AZ or any other state could require documentation of eligibility for the office that individuals are running for. Pass a law saying that a mere oath will not suffice to effectuate its citizenship and eligibility requirements. IOW, WHENEVER there is a citizenship or eligibility requirement, documentation above and beyond a mere oath is required.

This should be done in every state.

The problem I see is trying to have it “established in a reviewing court”. The entire judiciary is compromised when it comes to serious issues, IMHO. For instance, the IRS intimidation extended to all judges in CA, IIRC.


96 posted on 06/17/2013 8:14:04 AM PDT by butterdezillion (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

SCOTUS ping.


97 posted on 06/17/2013 8:14:19 AM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded
SCOTUS is following the Rule of Law and not simply acting as a legislature - something we decidedly don’t want them to do.

I don't know if I'd characterize it that way. There may be certain members who are following the rule of law, but there are others who joined on this decision who nearly always use their position on the court to legislate.

TO be honest with you, I can't help but wonder if, everything being so corrupt now, perhaps a little corruption is the only way to set things on the right track again.

98 posted on 06/17/2013 8:16:00 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

The Supreme Court has become as bogus and corrupt as the congress and the presidency. Nothing they do suprises me.


99 posted on 06/17/2013 8:16:39 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

It is a thin majority, to be sure, and we’re one Justice away from game over. That’s why I wonder what the hell Beck is trying to accomplish by going after CJ Roberts - if that is in fact what he’s trying to do.


100 posted on 06/17/2013 8:18:48 AM PDT by NonValueAdded (Unindicted Co-conspirators: The Mainstream Media)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-303 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson