Posted on 07/17/2016 12:40:43 PM PDT by COBOL2Java
RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Cheryl Fleming can’t wait to vote in November. The 54-year-old who lives in Fairfax County had her voting rights restored in April by Gov. Terry McAuliffe after losing them in 1989 for forging checks to buy drugs. She has never seen the inside of a polling booth.
“I was so excited I was screaming in the house,” Fleming said of hearing that she got her voting rights back. “I’ve put my life back together and this was still being held against me,” said Fleming, who now works as an Uber driver.
If Republican lawmakers are successful in their legal challenge to McAuliffe’s executive order, Fleming and more than 200,000 ex-felons who’ve completed their sentences could again be stripped of the ability to vote.
At issue when the Virginia Supreme Court meets Tuesday to hear the case is whether the state’s constitution allows governors to restore political rights en masse or requires them to be handled on a case-by-case basis.
Republicans say McAuliffe clearly violated the constitution, pointing to the words “person” and “his civil rights” in the document as evidence that governors can only “remove political disabilities” individually. That’s the conclusion reached by two previous administrations that studied the issue, Republicans note.
“Gov. McAuliffe is entitled to disagree with the policies of the Virginia Constitution, but he is not entitled to nullify those he dislikes,” attorneys for GOP House Speaker William Howell, Senate Majority Leader Thomas Norment and other voters write in their lawsuit.
(Excerpt) Read more at wtop.com ...
Let’s look equally long into some other pasts. Were not some simply lucky?
Either the Constitution was believed granted by God, or else not.
I Thessalonians 5:15 “See that no one repays anyone evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to everyone.”
Guess we'll have to keep them in prison longer then.
Upon what authority do you base this?
If that can be politically mustered. If not, “suck it up you haters.”
If the margin between fundamentally good and fundamentally bad is so narrow that this will upset it, then this indicates a corruption problem in government.
Seems logical that if their right to vote is restored their right to bear arms will be as well.??
More a corruption in society.
People who get abortions are at the least guilty of accomplice to murder. And people who voted for obama guilty of treason. Both of which are punishable by death. But they will still be allowed to vote.
IMO voting only counts on a local and state level and not in a presidential election. So it is a state’s decision.
The law has declared that they are not. Don’t like the law, say so, but right now that’s where the law is.
I say so all the time but no one listens.
So therefore these things are not crimes. They have to be legislated to be crimes.
And making a political vote into a crime is an instant dive into a totalitarian system.
It’s not every election that felons get a chance to vote for one of their own.
Obummer has made it legal that if you do not like a law you can ignore it. Law enforcement has a counter function. If you believe stealing Swisher Sweets is OK and the law say otherwise, you are not free to continue to do what you want in the eyes of the law. Your job is to change the law to make stealing Swisher Sweets legal. (However, if Swisher Sweets disappear from the marketplace, as, they are not profitable and there are none to steal, that is your problem.)
MacAwful believes he can act illegally, since, he believes he will be pardoned by Odingo, or, not prosecuted.
The flaw in the reasoning of all who believe as you do is the fact that our Lords commands are addressed to individual action. No where in the new testament is the problem of group violence addressed. Can a people defend themselves against another PEOPLE?
I’m referencing the Founders, not the Bible dumbass.
I’m not opposed to that.
OOO! Hostile man, he delivers.
Who is this man to which you are referring? Take your Bible thumping somewhere else. Levelheaded FReepers know about what I’m referring and are capable of engaging in logical dialogue. Using the Bible to be purposefully divisive is so obama, and I’m over that. By Felicia!
“But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.”
KillKillKillKill
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.