Skip to comments.Attorney General Eric Holder has no case against Texas voting laws
Posted on 07/26/2013 7:21:04 PM PDT by smoothsailing
July 26, 2013
In response to the Supreme Courts decision to strike down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, Attorney General Eric Holder announced Thursday a new legal tactic to combat voting laws he views as racially discriminatory. Texas, which has indicated that it plans to go ahead with its broadly popular voter ID law, will apparently be Holders first target.
Fortunately, racial-polarization politics works better in the political sphere than it does in the courtroom.
In contrast to the liberal hyperventilation over the Supreme Courts Shelby County v. Holder decision lamenting the return to Jim Crow or complaining that the Court would now permit egregious infringements on voting rights other sections of the VRA actually do permit the Attorney General to correct violations of voting rights by the states.
Unlike the now defunct Section 4 of the VRA, which identified a decades-old list of states requiring preclearance before making any changes to their voting laws, Holder is relying on Section 3, which permits aggrieved parties or the Attorney General to ask federal courts to require preclearance for jurisdictions which have committed recent Constitutional voting-rights violations.
This rarely used section of the VRA, sometimes referred to as the pocket trigger, allows courts to craft preclearance requirements for offending states that did not fit under the coverage formula previously contained in Section 4. The June decision in Shelby overturned Section 4, but left the other sections intact.
Although the lawsuit would be permitted under the VRA and is constitutional on its face, Holder has an extremely difficult case to argue.
Section 3 requires the Justice Department to prove that Texas voting laws are intentionally discriminatory a pretty tough standard. Its not enough to simply show that minorities are affected by a change.
Holders alleged smoking gun against Texas? He pointed to evidence of racial discrimination in a 2012 redistricting controversy and the history of pervasive voting-related discrimination against racial minorities in Texas.
Note how those pervasively racist Texans were busy electing Hispanic U.S. Senator Ted Cruz in the 2012 elections. Also, perhaps the fact that black voter turnout regularly outpaces white turnout in modern Texas is a more relevant measure of the states voting-related discrimination than is Holders memories of the 1960s. In any case, history isnt enough to condemn a state under Section 3. One needs to prove an actual, recent and intentional violation.
And there’s one final nuance to Section 3 that makes it harder for Holder to get his way against Texas. Judges may tailor any requirement for preclearance narrowly, such as only requiring preclearance for redistricting, but not for voter ID or other voting changes. Even if Holder successfully convinces the judges that preclearance is necessary for redistricting, its extremely unlikely a court would require preclearance for all voting changes across the entire state.
Bottom-line: the Attorney Generals most recent rallying cry to stand against discrimination is probably more about politics than it is about the VRA or the Constitution.
Isn’t this Clymer still in contempt of something?
He’s in contempt of liberty.
Holder tells his people where NOT to go.
As if Constitutional limitations on Federal power mean anything anymore.
Case or no case, it does not matter anymore than whether Trayvon Martin attacked Zimmerman in a homophobic rage.
Facts do not matter. Law does not matter. This is for politics and stoking racist emotions.
...racial-polarization politics works better in the political sphere than it does in the courtroom.
I've heard it said the best defense is a good offenseand Eric "the Red" Holder is offensive through and through.
It’s all a show, fires up the base and raises campaign cash. It’s so transparent and phony it’s laughable.
And of course it’s another distraction from this administration’s crimes. Tailor made to give the enemedia something new to divert attention with.
Holder doesn’t get the TV airtime that Obama does. I wonder if he attracts as many flies.
I think just generally contemptible.
The RATS are winning this by default with only a couple conservatives speaking out while the GOP-e with the likes of McCain, Graham, etc. cuddling up to Obummer, sickening to put it mildly.
Being the perpetual optimist, I like to think the GOPe is doing the rope-a-dope on Obama. Leading him on, just waiting to go in for the knockout punch.
Then I wake up. :o)
These tactics also scare rich whites into donating to the liberals.
Someday a state or corporation or someone is going to have to stand up to the feds and say “No more!”
Article I § 2: “The House of Representatives . . . and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.”
Notwithstanding age, and other amendments regarding race, gender, the states may set any other qualifications as they wish. Proving the identify of an elector is fully within the purview of the states per the constitution.
They are very smart to try this in Texas and they know exactly what they are doing. Holder is a political operative in the Obama Crime Family, he uses his position as the Attorney General of the United States as a political weapon in the war against opponents of the Democrat Party.
Holder could care less about the outcome in the Court Room. He is using this to convince Hispanics to reliably vote for Democrats just as Blacks currently do. If he can do it in Texas, the Democrats cannot be defeated in any national election. They must do this as Hispanics are like blue collar whites in that their own self interest lies in an allegiance with conservatives, but they frequently vote against their own self interests and support Democrats. This is all about making sure that behavior does not change.
Holder tried to threaten the North Carolina GA on their voters bill, the DAY they were voting on it.
It was great for race relations here in NC. The bill had already passed under the previous DEM Gov. Beverly Purdue WITH Democrat support, but NOW everyone who supported the previously passed bill is a racist.. because, well- y’know- it is the corrupt white man’s culture=- when a white man is governor!
Unbelievable! (Well not really- but sort of..)
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.