Posted on 06/25/2013 7:15:58 AM PDT by Perdogg
Per Drudge - FLASH: Section 4 of Voting Rights Act unconstitutional...
Makes sense to me.
We - the Voters - do not vote for any elective Federal position. All Federal positions are Appointed by or with the concurrence of the Executive, Legislative, and/or Judicial Branches.
We - the Voters - only vote for our respective State Representatives, Senators, or State Members to the Electoral College.
Also - Voting is not a Right. It is a Privilege granted by your State as a result of your Citizenship Residence within your State.
Ive seen nothing to refute this, nor have I ever seen it used to counter the Federal intrusion into what is constitutionally a State Power.
The VRA is over.
Its Section 5 and I have my fingers crossed its being thrown out.
It's probably important to remember Sec. 2 liability remains in effect, presumably everywhere. But that's another another story.
Chris Matthews will have a conniption...
” MSNBC will be burning tonight...
Chris Matthews will have a conniption... “
He used to drool years ago, when upset : )
If this immigration bill makes it into law, there will only be one possible outcome in 2016.
Sounds like good news, may have been helpful before redistricting.
Back when the rats had the Southern legislatures forcing them to draw Black districts helped us beat White rats in other seats, but now we have them and this law could be in our way.
Good to know Roberts hasn’t gone full tilt traitor ***hole.
” Good to know Roberts hasn’t gone full tilt traitor ***hole.”
Well, we are being literally terrorized by Obamacare. He got the big job done.
Yeah, that’s why he’ll be chilling out with Judas in the lowest level of hell.
BUMP
Blue states might take umbrage at being lumped in with those "racist" states, and resent even having to spend time and money going through the formality.
But I don't think they would have anything to fear from Holder or whomever Obama might appoint in his place. Obama wants to win elections, whatever it takes, as long as he has "deniability."
The ruling does not ban minority-majority districts, most of which are in states not covered by pre-clearance. If a state tried to, say, split up the Memphis area into two 35%-black CDs (which likely would elect two white Democrats), the DOJ or the courts could block it under Section 2 of the VRA just as they always could (and since TN has never been a covered state, they couldn’t have used Section 5 anyhow).
And whileit is true that preclearance was a sword that forced states to create minority-majority districts, which resulted in RAT legislatures being forced to bleach surrounding districts in the ‘90s, which helped the GOP immensely in the covered states, preclearance has been a shield that has allowed GOP legislatures to claim that they were forced to draw 60%-black (and thus 75%-Democrat) districts that, in reality, they wanted to draw because it helped them win surrounding districts. The NC GOP couldn’t have drawn 10 GOP CDs to only 3 RAT CDs had it not drawn 2 black-majority districts.
It is really a case of states rights versus the federal government. The 1965 Voting Rights Act took sovereignty away from certain states and made them subject to rules not applicable to the other states. On the issue of fairness and equal treatment alone, this was not constitutional. And to keep it in place until 2031 (the act was renewed for 25 years in 2006) was a travesty. Black voter turnout in the South is higher than white turnout.
So is this helpful at all? Meaningless? Symbolic? Slightly harmful?
That is what I have always believed. Also it seems to me that the 14th amendment would also make unconstitutional the Voting Rights Act punishing southern states, and by extension their citizens, but not other states, for 40 years. I believe Texas, for example, has the right to ensure that voters are eligible without being vetoed by Holder; otherwise legal votes are devalued.
And to keep it in place until 2031 (the act was renewed for 25 years in 2006) was a travesty. Black voter turnout in the South is higher than white turnout.
The GOP was too cowardly to oppose this preposterous and unjust renewal.
Helpful in that Holder won’t be able to use preclearance to delay voter ID laws, etc.
Recall that in 2006 the GOP House and GOP Senate and GOP POTUS extended this VRA without changes including the provisions that discriminate against all these Red States.
Their Reason ?? Compassion? To get Minority Votes? Well how did that work in 2206, 2008 and 2012? Minorities lining up to vote GOP?
Sound familiar? A GOP that stupid doesn't deserve to win. And they lost and lost.
The libs are in a tizzy that the SCOTUS threw the law (sect 4) back to congress to give them another chance to pick the states to punish. Yep, including the House.
A lib at work suggested this to me. I told them the House will get to work on this just as soon as they reverse citizen's united. OWCH!
Maddow in trying to make the case FOR Section 4 VRA tonight just proved the SCOTUS majority’s point.
She showed how last year a house Republican proposed an amendment that would cut off funding to enforce Sect 4+5. In response Dem house member John Lewis went into a fit on the floor screaming calling that proposal a disgrace and screaming citing the firehoses and beating and lynchings of ~ 50 years ago and so the House GOP apologized and withdrew the amendment cowering after publicly being labeled a racist.
Exactly what the SCOTUS 5-4 found and their reasoning and Maddow plays it, to argue the opposite
They will have to "punish" all states equally.
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.