Skip to comments.Justice Department will challenge Texas Voter ID law
Posted on 08/22/2013 10:25:07 AM PDT by Menehune56
The U.S. Justice Department announced Thursday that it will challenge Texass Voter ID law, saying it violates the Voting Rights Act, as well as the Constitutions 14th and 15th Amendments. (snip) The departments complain[t] alleges that the Texas Voter ID law was adopted with the purpose, and will have the result, of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority group.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
But this time they have to prove it in a real court, not the DOJ kangaroo court.
Just using their own insanity as a weapon. They are like drug addled petulant babies banging walls and screaming with their crazy cards to trump you and anyone in their way. F-n twilight zone to genocide.
Eric the Red and his sissy-boy boss can kiss our collective Texas asses.
And what happens when you mess with Texas?
Of course. Waste our taxpaying dollars on the stuff that doesn’t matter.
I speak pig latin but didn’t know there was an official group. Where do I sign up for membership and how soon will I get a card? Maybe Holder can make the membership card my voter ID card.
Last I heard was immigrants had to learn English to get US citizenship. Although how difficult is it to recognize the name of your candidate? Are we going to now have to print the names in Arabic or Chinese or a dozen other languages to appease Holder?
They will tell you to not to mess with Texas again
A person needs a photo ID to:
1. Buy any tobacco product
2. Buy any alcoholic product
3. Buy any type of firearm
4. Buy any ammunition for that firearm
5. Drive an automobile
6. Open a bank account or even access that bank account
7. Get a mortgage or loan of any type
8. Get insurance of any type
9. Get enrolled in college or university
10. Buy any type of glue, spray paint, fingernail polish remover or other flammable liquid
11. Use a credit card
I’m sure there are many others that I can’t think of just now...............BUT NOT TO VOTE?..............
Come and get some you lying, cheating, racist, elitist, communistic trash.
In a narrow decision, the justices invalidated a portion of the law that required a number of Southern states with a history of voter suppression to clear all new voting regulations with the federal govt. The court ruled that the criteria are outdated and gave Congress the option of updating it...... lawsuits have already been filed by other groups challenging the NC law.
Jerome Corsi writes in his book "What Went Wrong" in 2012-----that swing state Dem voter fraud is a fact of life unless voter ID happens. Dems also steal elections w/ early voting and by bussing in voting hordes.
The Holder Justice Department is the closest thing Americans have yet seen to the "Justice" system under the Nazis in Germany. Holder, of course, is still frustrated by not having such worthies as a Heinrich Himmler to carry out his orders; but the Departments of some of his fellow cabinet officers may be moving in that direction.
I jes’ get this mental picture of a guy ... must be a ranger .. looking into a suit’s eyes .. jes, kind’a .. “are you still here” look ... and totally ignoring him.
You get the horn - right where the sun don't shine.
So only speaking Spanish makes you a victim minority, worthy of special rights?
Gee...I remember when Civil Rights were about characteristics you were born with, and could do nothing about.
Like the color of your skin. Not the color of your shirt this morning.
Just last night the tv news in Austin was banging the drum about whether AG Greg Abbott was spending too much time and money suing the FedGov. I wonder (he says, pensively stroking his chin) if the two things are related.
You would think that this issue was settled already:
WASHINGTON The Supreme Court upheld Indianas voter-identification law on Monday, declaring that a requirement to produce photo identification is not unconstitutional and that the state has a valid interest in improving election procedures as well as deterring fraud.
Text of the Opinion
In a 6-to-3 ruling in one of the most awaited election-law cases in years, the court rejected arguments that Indianas law imposes unjustified burdens on people who are old, poor or members of minority groups and less likely to have drivers licenses or other acceptable forms of identification. Because Indianas law is considered the strictest in the country, similar laws in the other 20 or so states that have photo-identification rules would appear to have a good chance of surviving scrutiny.