freepmail BuckeyeTexan or Perdogg to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Posted on 06/27/2013 6:54:56 AM PDT by Perdogg
The Supreme Court has thrown out lower court rulings that blocked a Texas voter identification law and the state's political redistricting plans as discriminatory.
The court's action Thursday was a predictable result of its major ruling two days earlier that effectively ended the federal government's strict supervision of elections in Texas and other states with a history of discrimination in voting.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
As usual with these ambiguous headlines regarding court rulings, I’m not sure if this is good news or not.
The article does not fully explain this ruling. Can TX require a voter ID, or not?
The rats will find other creative ways to subvert/suppress free and fair elections...
Really, does anyone respect the supremes any more.
And when are we going to “just say no”?
Really.
It is good news. The Lower Court blocked Texas’ new voter ID law, the Supremes vacated the ruling.
Of course, "Love Child", "You Can't Hurry Love", were classics.
Like in SC TX voter ID stands as the law in the state. Voter Rights Act is dead.
They can, and they've already started to implement the new process.
The transition from real Americans seeing our government as legitimate to seeing what the far left has turned it into takes time. Obama has accelerated that change, as promised, and my impression is that far fewer patriotic Americans consider the federal government legitimate than ever before. We're VERY close to just saying "no".
“Barack Obama has made his decision; now let him enforce it!”.
Hum? I must need more coffee, because I still do not know if Texas can require ID to vote.
Is the article really that unclear?
My understanding: A lower court had halted the Texas ID law on the grounds it conflicted with the Voter’s Right Act. Since the Supreme Court threw out the Voter’s Right Act (or the list of states covered by it, which resulted in the same outcome). The lower court ruling was not moot, so it was dismissed as well. Result - Voter ID law goes into effect in Texas.
The State of Texas can implement its new voter ID law.
Dems were celibrated the SCOTUS ruling to advance state sponsored perversion big time last night, but having all those red states now advance their voter ID laws at the same time is ruining it for them.
Dude..this is good news. I mean, I know it’s hard to believe, but this is. In fact, many of the rulings this week have been good. The gay marriage thing of course was awful....
It is good news...it vacates the lower court’s ruling blocking it... and now it puts other states’ foot in the door for similar laws. This is a rare bit of good news.
That’s how I read it too.
Looks like a good thing!
Greg Abbott, TX Attorney Gen., said that voter ID in TX starts today. All those Mexican citizens who vote in border towns and in the Valley will still get to vote Democrat in next year’s election if amnesty is law by then.
It's about time, now we'll start seeing more fallout. Today's Dallas Morning News had an "interesting" letter to the editor. In a nutshell, he said he was a citizen, had been voting for 40 years without showing an ID, and no one was going to take away his rights now and make him show an ID to vote. His precinct might need extra security next time around.
The Voting Rights Act is alive and well. All that is dead is the preclearance section.
Ha ha! Good luck turning Texas blue now, you fraudulant liberals!!!
In the unlikely event that someone, somewhere, ACTUALLY tried to prevent blacks from voting again, I’m sure the Voting Rights Act as it stands now would do a fine job in making sure blacks can vote.
As discussed on Monday, Section V is difficult to enforce if Section IV is no longer applicable.
Correct, but the preclearance section was the thorn. Now that it’s removed it opens up the VRA to all kinds of litigation over the statistics, measurement and extent of racism in voting in the post-Confederate South.
How narrow can they go if you elect blacks, Indians, etc.? Are black/black districts racist?
prime the pumpon rejecting the legitimacy of government for a large number of people; it showed that government agencies could: intimidate the citizens, arm the Drug Cartels [definitionally Terrorists], violate treaties, commit felonies, execute unauthorized acts of war, and commit Treason… all without any significant repercussion.
No!.
Yeah, It's Discriminatory!
But Only Against Cheaters!!!
> The State of Texas can implement its new voter ID law.
Too bad this didnt happen a year ago in all states. It would have meant a landslide election for Romney.
They vacated the current ruling because it used the voting rights act. If someone sues again and they come up with another reason to suspend a ID law, they could do that, and when probably have to come back to the Supreme Court on the premise of the new reasoning.
Lone Star State.
More prophetic than catchy.
Even if amnesty is enacted it won’t immediately make them citizens, just not “illegals” anymore. (They would just be legal residents or whatever the term is, not citizens with voting rights.)
It takes several years to apply for citizenship, etc so as far as the next elections, they shouldn’t be able to vote if the voter ID laws go into effect and are enforced.
I’m sure democrats will try to change the laws to make citizenship quicker/easier.
We’ve got to stop any amnesty bill, regardless.
Gee, the Supreme Court decided there are a statue of limitations on discrimination from the 60’s. Maybe they’ll say there’s a statue of limitations on affirmative action.
The so called Voter’s Rights Act is ironic if nothing else.
Almost all of the areas that it covered were run by democrats when the violations took place and are now controlled by the Republicans. So the democrats committed the crimes and the Republicans got the punishment.
High court preserves Texas voter ID rules.
Mais non?
The Sheep follow the Communists and the Sheep Dogs follow the Constitution.
Unfortunately, the Sheep get to Vote and they elect Wolves.
I received this yesterday morning from Mississippi Secretary of Delbert Hosemann.
“The process for implementation of Constitutional Voter Identification begins today. It will be conducted in accordance with the Constitutional Amendment adopted by the electorate, funded by the Legislature, and regulations as proposed by the Secretary of State.”
Secretary of State, Delbert Hosemann
Then Arizona better copy their laws - I understand theirs got shot down.
You think these states would cooperate and when they're going to propose a law, check with those who have one that passed the bar - so to speak.
The Voter ID laws in Texas and Mississippi were like laws passed and in effect in other states but were held up by the DOJ because they were enabled to by the civil rights law of 1966? that gave them the authority to hold up or kill any state legislation that they wanted to in Southern states. The DOJ would have held it up in Indiana if they could have. The DOJ is FOR democrats stealing votes. Our Secretary of State says election fraud is 5 to 6% of the vote, this makes my vote count as .95% or less of a vote. I want one legal voter, one legal vote. If we win a close election it means we beat them by 6+% of the vote.
No matter what we think of the administration..it’s no skin off “0”’s nose as he sees it...he simply continues moving forward....he has to...
.....it’s like he’s playing a bad game of basketball by throwing as many balls as he can at the hoop and hoping one of them is a slam dunk so at least he can say he scored..
More and more states are stepping up and saying “NO”.....let’s hope this gains momentum...soon!
” Dems were celibrated the SCOTUS ruling to advance state sponsored perversion big time last night, but having all those red states now advance their voter ID laws at the same time is ruining it for them.”
Allow me a tear : )
I live in a small mostly rural community in Idaho. I know personally all the people who work at the polling place where I vote. For several election cycles picture ID has been required. Even though I know them, they request and I happily display my identification. No lawsuits to force us to stop doing so.
The difference between Idaho and swing states or states that the democrats want to capture is that there isn't a snowball's chance of surviving Satan's back porch that we in Idaho will elect a democrat to the White Hut (someday, maybe "House" again).
And soo are alot of laws that have their merit cutoff from them. I would hate to be in Constitution law.
Kind of like the Biblical splitting the baby.
Life-time appointments should be eliminated....completely.
EODGUY
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.