Skip to comments.
Wisconsin, Texas voter ID laws blocked by courts
LATimes ^
| 10-9-14
| David G. Savage
Posted on 10/09/2014 8:51:56 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-73 next last
To: RIghtwardHo
Let’s face it, the U.S. Constitution is pretty dang wobbly right now and is on its last legs thanks to Obama and his ‘RATS. All we have left are the state constitutions. If a state constitution demands that a person must be a resident of that state to vote in their election, the state should have the right to make the voter prove that they are a resident. These Feral “judges” should have no say in how a state wants to run its elections. That’s just flat out moronic.
21
posted on
10/09/2014 9:39:50 PM PDT
by
FlingWingFlyer
(Got Ebola? Come to America!)
To: july4thfreedomfoundation
Are they that freakin stupid?
________________________________________
Yes, they are.
I know they’re that freakin’ stupid.
But we know the real reason they don’t want voter ID. It would make it easier to stop voter fraud.
22
posted on
10/09/2014 9:56:37 PM PDT
by
boycott
To: taxcontrol
Well, that would mean violence. Nobody has the stomach for that. Nobody wants to be called racist.
23
posted on
10/09/2014 10:17:25 PM PDT
by
virgil
(The evil that men do lives after them)
To: MrShoop
I think it is growing more and more clear that Roberts is another Souter.Or Earl Warren.
24
posted on
10/09/2014 10:47:21 PM PDT
by
re_nortex
(DP - that's what I like about Texas)
To: ilgipper; All
"Its crazy how rapidly this happened." Progressives have arguably been lurking in the bushes from the time the USA was founded. In fact, the early 20th century 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th Amendments to the Constitution are regarded as products of the Progressive Movement.
To: afraidfortherepublic
1 judge is all it takes. Where are the illegals? How many boxes of ballots are in trunks of cars ready to go? How many dead and moved voters on the rolls that Obama made it illegal to purge? Nothing to see here folks.
Why doesn’t Texas just tell the judge piss off. It is Texas law.
There is no constitutional right to vote. It is a state issue.
To: RIghtwardHo
I think it's simply that Roberts is Bush's Souter. Like father, like son.
In hindsight, maybe we would have been better off with Harriet Miers after all.
-PJ
27
posted on
10/09/2014 11:58:45 PM PDT
by
Political Junkie Too
(If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
To: Political Junkie Too
In hindsight, maybe we would have been better off with Harriet Miers after all. Miers morphed into Alito. That was a win.
Roberts was the guy from the git-go.
28
posted on
10/10/2014 12:07:02 AM PDT
by
okie01
(The Mainstream Media: Ignorance on parade.)
To: okie01
Roberts wasn't initially nominated for Chief Justice. He was nominated to replace O'Connor. When Rehnquist died, Bush pulled Roberts' nomination and renominated him for the Chief Justice. Then Bush nominated Miers to replace O'Connor.
Maybe Bush should have kept Roberts as O'Connor's replacement, then Miers or someone else would be the Chief Justice now?
-PJ
29
posted on
10/10/2014 12:21:22 AM PDT
by
Political Junkie Too
(If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
Comment #30 Removed by Moderator
To: afraidfortherepublic
"struck down that state's new voter ID law on the grounds that it violated the constitutional right to vote"
No such right exists. That's one reason Minor vs. Happersett was decided as it was.
31
posted on
10/10/2014 1:07:32 AM PDT
by
sourcery
(Valid rights must be perfectly reciprocal.)
To: Political Junkie Too
I hope more freepers comes to the realization that Scotus couldn't have p!ssed on the states as it has these past eighty years without the protection of the 17th Amendment.
We can thank the 17th for every judicial outrage since the New Deal.
32
posted on
10/10/2014 1:18:23 AM PDT
by
Jacquerie
(Article V. If not now, when?)
Comment #33 Removed by Moderator
To: afraidfortherepublic
In Texas the judge started hearing the case in September, a month ago. The case was filed 18 months ago. That alone should be enough to THROW OUT the decision.
34
posted on
10/10/2014 2:37:55 AM PDT
by
BobL
(Don't forget - Today's Russians learn math WITHOUT calculators.)
To: afraidfortherepublic
Did they also rule that food stamps are unconstitutional because it is too difficult for the “poor” to get them?
35
posted on
10/10/2014 2:52:10 AM PDT
by
Octar
To: afraidfortherepublic
To: afraidfortherepublic; All
Lawyers for the ACLU had noted the state had already sent out thousands of absentee ballots without mentioning the need for voters to return a copy of the photo identification. if true that's just pure stupidity on the state's part.
37
posted on
10/10/2014 4:02:59 AM PDT
by
God luvs America
(63.5 million pay no income tax and vote for DemoKrats...)
To: Drango
Odious. We are becoming a banana republic.WRONG! Most third-world banana republics require voter ID.
To: afraidfortherepublic
Perhaps it's time conservatives began playing the same game, then.
"Your ID, please?
"Don't have one. Now gimme a ballot."
39
posted on
10/10/2014 4:12:15 AM PDT
by
daler
To: afraidfortherepublic; Windflier
I thought this was already a done deal in Texas? (((ping))
40
posted on
10/10/2014 4:20:34 AM PDT
by
Envisioning
(My desire to be well informed is at odds with my desire to remain sane....)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-73 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson