Free Republic 4th Quarter Fundraising Target: $85,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $20,470
24%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 24% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Keyword: votingrightsact

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Justice Dept. files in Ohio, Wisconsin voter cases (legalizing fraud?)

    07/30/2014 8:15:50 PM PDT · by Olog-hai · 14 replies
    Associated Press ^ | Jul 30, 2014 7:00 PM EDT | Eric Tucker
    The Justice Department on Wednesday sided with challengers of voting laws in Wisconsin and Ohio, saying in court filings that measures in those states unfairly affect minority voters. The department criticized a Wisconsin law that requires voters to present photo identification at the polls and an Ohio law that limits when voters can cast an early ballot. The court papers from the federal government are aimed at persuading judges that the laws, which are being challenged in court, are discriminatory and block access to the ballot box. […] The Justice Department has warned of legal actions against states after the...
  • House Judiciary chair: Voting Rights Act adequate, no deal soon on immigration

    06/27/2014 9:39:34 AM PDT · by jazusamo · 4 replies
    Dallas News ^ | June 26, 2014 | Todd J. Gillman
    WASHINGTON — A key GOP lawmakers said Thursday that he’s in no hurry to restore Justice Department scrutiny to Texas and other states under the Voting Rights Act. A year ago, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a key part of that landmark civil rights law — the formula that identified nine states and some smaller jurisdictions with such an egregious history of violating the rights of voters that they would have to get federal permission before moving a polling site, shifting district boundaries or making any other election-related change. “There is a great deal of dispute in many quarters...
  • Black Caucus targets Goodlatte in push for voting rights fix

    06/18/2014 11:31:25 AM PDT · by jazusamo · 8 replies
    The Hill ^ | June 18, 2014 | Mike Lillis
    The head of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) is pushing House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) to take up legislation restoring the voting rights protections shot down by the Supreme Court last year. Democratic leaders and others urging consideration of the bipartisan bill to update the 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA) have previously focused their pressure campaign on House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.). But with Boehner showing little interest and Cantor soon to exit leadership after last week's primary loss, CBC Chairwoman Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio) switched gears Wednesday and turned the pressure directly on...
  • Betrayal of Dr. King: Traitorous Blacks Abandoned His Dream

    06/14/2014 8:49:55 AM PDT · by kingattax · 54 replies
    Clash Daily ^ | June 13, 2014 | by Lloyd Marcus
    Sipping a hot cup of unsweetened green tea at 3am, I felt compelled to revisit Dr Martin Luther King, Jr’s “I Have a Dream” speech on the internet. These excerpts leaped out at me. And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood. I have...
  • Judges and Voter ID (Wisconsin)

    05/02/2014 9:58:50 AM PDT · by jazusamo · 33 replies
    National Review Online ^ | May 2, 2014 | Hans A. von Spakovsky
    If the state provides free IDs, is there really an “unjustified burden” on poor voters?To better understand the contrast between an activist, liberal judge who refuses to follow the law and a judge who understands that his job is to follow precedent and the Constitution, consider two recent federal cases on voter-ID laws. On Tuesday, federal-district-court judge Lynn Adelman — a Clinton appointee, former Democratic state senator, and former Legal Aid Society lawyer — held that Wisconsin’s voter-ID requirement violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, as well as the Fourteenth Amendment, because it places “an unjustified burden on...
  • Black GA Legislators Sue to Dissolve ‘Super-Majority White Cities’

    03/29/2011 4:47:17 PM PDT · by mandaladon · 32 replies
    The Blaze ^ | 29 Mar 2011 | Emily Esfahani Smith
    The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports: The Georgia Legislative Black Caucus filed a lawsuit Monday against the state of Georgia seeking to dissolve the city charters of Dunwoody, Sandy Springs, Johns Creek, Milton and Chattahoochee Hills. Further, the lawmakers, joined by civil rights leader the Rev. Joseph Lowery, aim to dash any hopes of a Milton County. The lawsuit, filed in a North Georgia U.S. District Court Monday, claims that the state circumvented the normal legislative process and set aside its own criteria when creating the “super-majority white ” cities within Fulton and DeKalb counties. The result, it argues, is to dilute...
  • Sensenbrenner on Camera Denies Text of Own Voter Law (Good read)

    03/05/2014 1:17:22 PM PST · by jazusamo · 16 replies
    National Review Online ^ | March 5, 2014 | J. Christian Adams
    Wisconsin Republican seeks to restore racial categories, empower Holder DOJ Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R., Wisc.) told constituents at Wisconsin town halls that voting-rights legislation he is sponsoring does not exclude white voters from the protection of the Voting Rights Act. Sensenbrenner also says he is proud to work with the ACLU and far-left groups to pass the legislation that would resurrect Attorney General Eric Holder’s powers to block state election laws such as voter ID or citizenship verification. In a video from Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe, Sensenbrenner also accused Texas and Georgia Republicans of trying to stop minorities from...
  • Cantor in a pickle on voting rights

    01/20/2014 3:54:49 AM PST · by Cincinatus' Wife · 17 replies
    The Hill ^ | January 20, 2014 | Mike Lillis
    The bill also includes a sweetener for Virginians. Under the old provisions shot down by the Supreme Court, the Old Dominion was one of nine states with histories of voter discrimination required to get federal approval before they changed their election procedures. Under the new proposal – which aims to update the formula dictating which states are subject to the extra scrutiny – only four states would be forced to seek such approval. Virginia is not among them. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), a long-time voting rights champion and a lead sponsor of the updated protections, noted Thursday that Rep. Spencer...
  • A Step Toward Restoring Voting Rights (NYT barf alert)

    01/18/2014 10:08:34 PM PST · by Brad from Tennessee · 26 replies
    New York Times ^ | January 18, 2014 | The Editorial Board
    Only seven months after the Supreme Court shattered the Voting Rights Act, a bipartisan group of lawmakers has come up with a bill that would go a long way toward putting it back together. If they can persuade Republicans in Congress to set aside partisanship and allow it to pass, they would begin to restore justice to a deeply damaged electoral process. It would be an ideal way to observe the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday this week. The bill is far from perfect. In particular, it does not give enough weight to the discriminatory effect of voter ID...
  • Power play: Federal ruling forbids states from checking voters’ citizenship

    01/18/2014 9:41:19 AM PST · by jazusamo · 59 replies
    The Washington Times ^ | January 18, 2014 | Stephen Dinan
    A federal commission rejected three states’ requests to ask voters for proof of citizenship, issuing a complex decision Friday that said it’s up to the national government, not the states, to decide what to include on registration forms. Under the motor-voter law, federal officials distribute voter-registration forms in all of the states. Arizona, Kansas and Georgia all asked that those forms request proof of citizenship, but the federal Election Assistance Commission rejected that in a 46-page ruling. The EAC said states can check driver’s license databases or ask federal immigration authorities for information, but they cannot tell the federal government...
  • Sensenbrenner’s VRA Bill Wins Praise from Far-Left, Soros-Connected Race-Hustling Groups

    01/17/2014 8:59:46 AM PST · by Mount Athos · 26 replies
    PJ tattler ^ | 1/17/2014 | Bryan Preston
    Republican Rep. James Sensenbrenner (WI) this week announced his intention to pass a bill “reforming” the Voting Rights Act. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act last year. As Christian Adams reported, Sensenbrenner’s bill would “radically expand federal power over state elections. It would give Attorney General Eric Holder expansive new federal powers over state elections, including the ability to barge into polling places to monitor the use of foreign language election materials. It would also give Holder the power to block election integrity measures like Voter ID and citizenship verification.” Holder has earned...
  • Rep. Sensenbrenner pushes bill to update Voting Rights Act (RINO)

    01/16/2014 7:37:00 PM PST · by jazusamo · 35 replies
    The Washington Times ^ | January 16, 2014 | Stephen Dinan
    Key lawmakers announced a rewrite of the Voting Rights Act on Thursday, creating a test to judge which states are still so discriminatory that they need federal scrutiny of their voting decisions — moving to revive the iconic law just months after the Supreme Court declared part of it unconstitutional. In their June decision, the justices said Congress couldn’t use discrimination from four decades ago to single out states for special federal scrutiny, so the proposal would update the test to look at recent federal court rulings that found a state or municipality violated voting laws. ~snip~ Hans A. von...
  • Omnibus Funds ‘Permanent Extended Coffee Break’ for Dozens of DOJ Employees

    01/14/2014 12:22:22 PM PST · by jazusamo · 6 replies
    PJ Media ^ | January 14, 2014 | J. Christian Adams
    After the Court's Shelby decision, dozens of DOJ lawyers have nothing to do. But not one has been laid off. Hans von Spakovsky has the inside scoop of the new omnibus spending bill. Most notably, the new bill funds the government jobs of dozens Department of Justice employees who no longer have any work to do after the Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act. Von Spakovsky writes: Of course, the other thing needed with the Civil Rights Division is a cutback in its budget, which has grown considerably, and gives Eric Holder the resources to...
  • If N.C.'s Voter ID Law 'Racist,' Why'd Obama Happily Comply With Illinois' ID Law?

    10/03/2013 5:07:06 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 5 replies
    Investors.com ^ | October 3, 2013 | IBD Editorial
    Politics: Defying the Supreme Court, the administration is suing North Carolina for requiring valid ID at the polls, a rule that President Obama had no problem complying with in his home state. North Carolina is the first state to make changes to its voting laws after June's Supreme Court ruling making it harder for the Justice Department to block such changes under the outdated Voting Rights Act of 1965. Raleigh's new GOP majority passed a common-sense law making all voters show a state driver's license or other valid ID to guard against fraudulent ballots. The law will help stop noncitizens...
  • Mobilizing Election Integrity, at Judicial Watch

    09/26/2013 3:01:35 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 4 replies
    PJ Media ^ | September 26, 2013 | J. Christain Adams
    Judicial Watch is mobilizing resources for the fight over election integrity — the organization has just announced the hiring of former Department of Justice Voting Section Deputy Chief Robert Popper. This is very bad news for vote fraudsters, vote deniers, and organizations (including Eric Holder’s Justice Department) that stand in the way of election integrity. Popper worked with me on the New Black Panther case at the Justice Department. This means that three of the four lawyers who worked on that case have left DOJ, and are now on the side of preventing lawlessness in voting rather than aiding and...
  • Holder's Texas Vendetta: He Suppresses Voter ID Truth

    09/06/2013 2:45:56 PM PDT · by raptor22 · 4 replies
    Investor's Business Daily ^ | September 6, 2013 | IBD EDITORIALS
    Voting Rights: While the Department of Justice sues Texas over its Voter ID law, analysis of Georgia's 2008 statute shows turnout increased among all groups, including blacks and Hispanics. Jim Crow, call your office. When on June 25 the U.S. Supreme Court freed southern states from the most onerous part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, ruling that continuing certain requirements could not be justifiably based on past voter suppression but could be justified only if current discrimination against minorities could be proved, the decision did not sit well with Eric Holder's Department of Justice. In August, DOJ's civil rights...
  • Republican Rep. Sensenbrenner: Re-Impose the ‘Full Power’ of the 1965 Voting Rights Act

    09/03/2013 9:56:33 AM PDT · by jazusamo · 48 replies
    PJ Media ^ | September 3, 2013 | Bryan Preston
    PJ Media has engaged in a long-running series of articles regarding Republicans who are trying to re-impose the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which was partially struck down by the US Supreme Court this summer. We reported that staff within the Republican National Committee are working to re-impose it, outside the public eye. The RNC officially and vehemently denied. But. We’ve also tracked the statements of elected Republicans including Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, and the activities of their lobbyists and staffs. Sensenbrenner is under the influence of a long-time former staffer who is currently lobbying for the far-left ACLU. Juan Williams, Democrat...
  • Exclusive: ACLU Lobbyist Behind Sensenbrenner’s Voting Rights Act ‘Fix’

    08/27/2013 4:40:07 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 4 replies
    PJ Media ^ | August 27, 2013 | Bryan Preston
    Earlier today, J. Christian Adams reported comments made by Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) regarding the Voting Rights Act. Sharing the podium with Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, Sensenbrenner told a Washington audience Monday that he wants to “fix” the part of the law that the Supreme Court recently struck down. Sensenbrenner said he wants to fix the law so that it is immune to court challenges. “The first thing we have to do is take the monkey wrench that the court threw in it, out of the Voting Rights Act, and then use that monkey wrench to be able...
  • Justice Ginsburg has no plans to retire

    08/25/2013 6:06:05 AM PDT · by markomalley · 26 replies
    The Hill ^ | 8/25/2013
    Justice Ruth Ginsburg said she has no plans to retire from the Supreme Court and suggested she could continue her work after President Obama’s term. In an interview published Sunday by The New York Times, Ginsburg said she was in good health after surviving two bouts with cancer. She said she intended to keep working “as long as I can do the job full steam.” She also said she was hopeful the president after Obama “will be a fine president,” a statement that could indicate the end of Obama’s term is not a factor in her plans. Ginsburg, 80, is...
  • Obama: VRA decision 'small-bore stuff compared to lynching'

    07/30/2013 8:57:31 AM PDT · by NotYourAverageDhimmi · 6 replies
    Politico ^ | July 29, 2013 | Reid J. Epstein & Jennifer Epstein
    The setback from the Supreme Court’s decision striking down elements of the Voting Rights Act is bad, but not as daunting hurdles from past generations, President Barack Obama told a White House gathering of civil rights leaders Monday.  “He said, ‘When you think about it, this is small-bore stuff compared to lynching and shootings and killings that happened 50 years ago,’” one participant in the meeting told POLITICO. “He said, ‘Ultimately this is within our power to change.’” Obama told the group of about 15 civil rights leaders that it will be incumbent upon alert the Justice Department flag violations...
  • EXCLUSIVE: RNC Operatives Join Eric Holder’s Campaign Against Texas, Several Other States

    07/26/2013 10:08:36 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 65 replies
    Pajamas Media ^ | 07/26/2013 | The Tatler
    Attorney General Eric Holder announced Thursday that the Justice Department will seek to recapture Texas and return it to federal oversight for approval of all election law changes such as photo voter identification. Holder’s move comes after the Supreme Court in June freed Texas and other states from the requirement that all state election laws be approved in Washington, D.C. Holder’s move prompted outrage from Texas Senators Ted Cruz, John Cornyn and Governor Rick Perry. The three should also be angry with the Republican National Committee. PJ Tatler has learned that staff at the RNC have been spending RNC donations...
  • Kansas voting laws could face Justice Department scrutiny

    07/25/2013 7:17:58 PM PDT · by Tailgunner Joe · 15 replies
    kansas.com ^ | July 25, 2013 | Dion Lefler
    Kansas laws could be targeted as the U.S. attorney general on Thursday announced a new federal offensive against state restrictions on voting rights. Attorney General Eric Holder said Thursday that he is shifting resources in the Justice Department to pursue more legal action against state-by-state voting restrictions. He said his efforts will begin with Texas and expand to other states where voting issues have surfaced. Joan Wagnon, chairwoman of the Kansas Democratic Party, applauded Holder’s speech and said she’s considering contacting the Justice Department over the issue of more than 12,000 Kansas voters whose registration is “in suspense” because of...
  • Holder Wants Texas to Clear Voting Changes With the U.S.

    07/25/2013 6:42:54 PM PDT · by Nachum · 44 replies
    NYT ^ | 7/25/13 | CHARLIE SAVAGE
    WASHINGTON — Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced on Thursday that the Justice Department would ask a court to require Texas to get permission from the federal government before making voting changes in that state. The move opens a new chapter in the political struggle over election rules after the Supreme Court struck down a portion of the Voting Rights Act last month. In a speech before the National Urban League in Philadelphia, Mr. Holder also indicated that the filing, expected later on Thursday, was most likely just an opening salvo in a new Obama administration strategy to try...
  • Ted Cruz: Eric Holder refusing to follow the law

    07/25/2013 7:25:27 PM PDT · by Tailgunner Joe · 34 replies
    washingtonexaminer.com ^ | July 25, 2013 | Ashe Schow
    Sen. Ted Cruz said Thursday that Attorney General Eric Holder is continuing a "longstanding pattern of refusing to follow the law" with his decision to disregard the U.S. Supreme Court and force Texas to seek federal approval for changes to voting laws. The Texas Republican's comment came in a stern statement in which he also accused Holder of politicizing the Justice Department. "Holder's refusal to accept the judgment of the U.S. Supreme Court regarding preclearance continues the department's longstanding pattern of refusing to follow the law," Cruz said. He was referring to the high court's June 25 decision declaring as...
  • John Lewis praises DOJ voting rights action in Texas, says N.C. should be next

    07/25/2013 8:31:34 PM PDT · by Tailgunner Joe · 24 replies
    ajc.com ^ | July 25, 2013 | Daniel Malloy
    Rep. John Lewis praised Attorney General Eric Holder's push to place the state of Texas under pre-clearance requirements for voting laws under Section 3 of the Voting Rights Act. In an interview with the AJC today, the Atlanta Democrat said he thinks North Carolina should be next. "I'm very encouraged to see the Attorney General and the Department of Justice take this position. I think it's long overdue. ... Without Section 4 I think it's so fitting and appropriate for the Department of Justice to take the action. And I wish they would take a serious look at what has...
  • Obama administration declares new voter rights strategy

    07/25/2013 8:09:35 PM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 29 replies
    Reuters ^ | July 25, 2013 | By David Ingram and Dave Warner
    The Obama administration embarked on a new strategy on Thursday to challenge voting laws it says discriminate by race, an effort to counter a Supreme Court ruling last month that freed states from the strictest federal oversight. Attorney General Eric Holder vowed to start in Texas, a conservative stronghold. Texas' voter ID law requires voters to show a photo ID before casting a ballot, a measure its supporters, mostly Republicans, said is necessary to prevent fraud. Democrats said it would disproportionately affect the poor and minorities because even getting a free photo ID would require travel to a state office...
  • Obama Offers Up More Of The Same: division, polarization and moving to the left.

    07/25/2013 7:50:38 PM PDT · by Innovative · 15 replies
    Forbes ^ | July 24, 2013 | Doug Schoen
    Obama doubled down on his approach in 2012: division, polarization and moving to the left. Much like in 2012, the President placed little emphasis on tax reform or growth. The President emphasized redistribution above all else, but with, again, no long-term plan as to how he would finally make this approach an effective one.
  • Reps. Sensenbrenner and Lewis urge Congress to restore Voting Rights Act

    07/17/2013 4:13:35 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 26 replies
    The Hill ^ | July 17, 2013 | Mike Lillis
    A liberal civil rights hero and a conservative Wisconsin Republican joined forces Wednesday in an uphill fight to restore the voting protections shot down last month by the Supreme Court. Reps. John Lewis (D-Ga.), and James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) urged a Senate panel to bury partisan differences and update the Voting Rights Act, a 48-year-old law designed to protect voter access in states with histories of racial discrimination. "The responsibility to combat racial discrimination in electoral practices is one of the most important constitutional duties of Congress," Lewis told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. "The burden cannot be on those...
  • Unequal States: Why the US Still Needs Race Protection Laws (barf alert)

    06/29/2013 3:14:52 AM PDT · by Olog-hai · 9 replies
    Der Spiegel ^ | June 26, 2013 – 04:25 PM | Mark Pitzke
    The United States Supreme Court has spoken. The country’s highest court has essentially ruled that racism is a thing of the past in America. Gone are the times when black people were hunted down and lynched, times when Congress had to provide African-Americans with legislative protection, like the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the greatest achievement of the US civil rights movement. … “Our nation has made great strides,” Chief Justice John Roberts, born in Buffalo, New York, wrote in the majority decision. But has it? Certainly. The situation today is nowhere near as bad as it was during the...
  • Affirming Action

    06/27/2013 1:54:13 PM PDT · by Kaslin · 3 replies
    Townhall.com ^ | June 27, 2013 | Cal Thomas
    "Character, not circumstance, makes the person." -- Booker T. Washington The Supreme Court's narrow 5-4 decision to strike down a central component of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, "freeing nine states, mostly in the South," writes the New York Times, "to change their election laws without advance federal approval," is a welcome recognition that times have changed and that especially Southern states must not forever bear a "mark of Cain" for past discrimination against racial minorities. Reaction from "civil rights groups" and liberal media outlets was predictable. Writing in the Washington Post, Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) accused the Court of...
  • The Race Card

    06/27/2013 10:56:59 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 12 replies
    Townhall.com ^ | June 27, 2013 | Michael Reagan
    Will the Left ever stop playing the race card? Not in my lifetime, it won't. The Obama Left in this country acts like we're still living in 1960, when racism was legally, socially and morally sanctioned across the South and elsewhere. Here's a newsflash, folks. It's 2013. Racism is not extinct and never will be as long as human beings walk the Earth. But despite President Obama's constant efforts to persuade his low-information constituencies otherwise, examples of overt or institutionalized racism are harder to find in America today than a rotary pay phone or a Studebaker. Of course, this reality...
  • GOP's Sensenbrenner calls for update of Voting Rights Act

    06/26/2013 2:20:48 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 36 replies
    The Hill ^ | June 26, 2013 | Mike Lillis
    A leading House Republican is calling on Congress to update the Voting Rights Act just a day after the Supreme Court neutered its central provision. Warning that "the threat of discrimination still exists," Rep. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) is urging lawmakers from both parties to cast aside partisanship and restore the law for the sake of protecting voters' rights. "The Voting Rights Act is vital to America’s commitment to never again permit racial prejudices in the electoral process," Sensenbrenner, the second-ranked Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said Wednesday in a statement. "This is going to take time and will...
  • Malkin: the Liberal Racists' 'Uncle Tom' Card

    06/26/2013 7:27:23 AM PDT · by yoe · 6 replies
    GOPUSA ^ | June 26, 2013 | Michelle Malkin
    Meet Ryan Patrick Winkler. He's a 37-year-old liberal Minnesota state legislator with a B.A. in history from Harvard University and a J.D. from the University of Minnesota Law School. He's also a coward, a bigot, a liar and a textbook example of plantation progressivism. On Tuesday, Winkler took to Twitter to rant about the Supreme Court's decision to strike down an onerous section of the Voting Rights Act. The 5-4 ruling overturned an unconstitutional requirement that states win federal preclearance approval of any changes to their election laws and procedures. Winkler fumed: "VRA majority is four accomplices to race discrimination...
  • Supreme Court strikes down part of Voting Rights Act

    06/25/2013 7:40:20 AM PDT · by NotYourAverageDhimmi · 92 replies
    NBC News ^ | June 24, 2013 | Pete Williams and Erin McClam
    The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a civil rights law that requires some states to get federal permission to change their voting rules, but it struck down the formula for which jurisdictions are covered — leaving it to Congress to redraw the map. The opinion was written by Chief Justice John Roberts. The vote was 5-4. “Our country has changed, and while any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions,” Roberts wrote for the court. Under the law, the Voting Rights Act of 1965,...
  • Supreme Court Buries Section 5 of Voting Rights Act (J. Christian Adams assessment)

    06/25/2013 10:49:52 AM PDT · by jazusamo · 22 replies
    PJ Media ^ | June 25, 2013 | J. Christian Adams
    The Supreme Court has decided Shelby v. Holder. It is one of the most important decisions in decades. Now, federal preclearance of state election procedures seems to be forever dead and buried. While some Congressional Republicans had vowed to enact new legislation to “fix” any coverage formula deemed unconstitutional, the Court opinion today offers almost no room to do so. They would have to decide what’s more important: the Republican Party, or the Constitution? Section 5 required states to obtain preclearance approval for any change involving elections — any change, even moving a polling place 20 feet. Only 15 states...
  • Obama: Supreme Court Decision a 'Setback,' Says He's 'Deeply Disappointed'

    06/25/2013 9:46:18 AM PDT · by Rusty0604 · 58 replies
    Weekly Standard ^ | 06/25/2013 | Daniel Halper
    In a statement, President Obama called today's Supreme Court decision on the Voting Rights Act a "setback." "I am deeply disappointed with the Supreme Court’s decision today. For nearly 50 years, the Voting Rights Act – enacted and repeatedly renewed by wide bipartisan majorities in Congress – has helped secure the right to vote for millions of Americans. Today’s decision invalidating one of its core provisions upsets decades of well-established practices that help make sure voting is fair, especially in places where voting discrimination has been historically prevalent," reads Obama's statement.
  • The New Art of Fence Sitting - The Supreme Court's Ambiguity

    06/25/2013 9:07:54 AM PDT · by fwdude · 28 replies
    Self | fwdude
    Am I the only one who has noticed an increasing penchant for the Supreme Court to return non-answers to critical issues? The latest "Voter Rights" decision leaves the Federal Government in charge of determining when minority rights are violated, but now must be done procedurally, not discriminatorily toward us "raaaaaacist" states. Honestly, how hard is it to actually rely on the Constitution and principles of clear thinking to come up with the fact that a state has decided to reserve marriage to only a man and a woman? Either they can or they can't. But who wants to bet that...
  • Per Drudge - FLASH: Section 4 of Voting Rights Act unconstitutional...

    06/25/2013 7:15:58 AM PDT · by Perdogg · 85 replies
    Per Drudge - FLASH: Section 4 of Voting Rights Act unconstitutional...
  • This Study Said the South Is More Racist Than the North

    06/25/2013 5:26:10 AM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 78 replies
    Mother Jones ^ | June 25, 2013 | Nick Baumann
    The fate of the Voting Rights Act before the Supreme Court may hinge on whether it's right."Is it the government's submission that the citizens of the South are more racist than the citizens of the North?" John Roberts, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, asked that in February during oral arguments over the fate of the Voting Rights Act, a 1965 civil rights law. Donald Verrilli, the government's chief lawyer, said no. Not surprisingly, the Obama administration was not willing to assert that citizens in Southern states were statistically more likely to hold racist beliefs. Without making such a...
  • Historic Week Ahead for SCOTUS - Live Thread 10:00 AM

    06/23/2013 9:35:33 PM PDT · by BuckeyeTexan · 65 replies
    Free Republic | 06/24/2013 | BuckeyeTexan
    As the Supreme Court heads into its summer recess at the end of June, we're still awaiting decisions this week in four landmark cases. "In the court’s modern history, I don’t think there has ever been one week with so much at stake,” said Tom Goldstein, founder of the respected SCOTUSblog website. “We have four pending cases that may be cited for at least a century.” Affirmative Action: Fisher v. University of Texas Petitioner Abigail Fisher, a white Texan, was denied admission to the University of Texas at Austin for the Fall 2008 entering class. Fisher sued the university, arguing...
  • GOP’s Quin Hillyer Slams Farrakhan’s Involvement with Alabama Democrats

    06/15/2013 12:34:38 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 4 replies
    PJ Media ^ | June 14, 2013 | J. Christian Adams
    PJ Media first reported on the anti-Semite, anti-white bigot Louis Farrakhan ‘s participation in a series of Democrat-sponsored rallies across Alabama in support of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The case of Shelby v. Holder will be decided by the Supreme Court this month and may strike down the requirement that 15 states submit all election-law changes to the federal government for approval. This requirement has been used to block a variety of state laws designed to protect election integrity, including Texas voter ID and Georgia citizenship-verification requirements to vote. In support of this “preclearance” requirement, a group...
  • Eric Holder instructs Justice Department to defraud Supreme Court

    03/20/2013 9:11:08 AM PDT · by Oldpuppymax · 7 replies
    Coach is Right ^ | 3/19/13 | Doug Book
    In yet another testament to the corrupt if inventive workings of the liberal mind, Attorney General Eric Holder recently decided to defraud the United States Supreme Court in the hope of preventing sections of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) being ruled unconstitutional. Section 5 of the VRA requires 9 Southern states and a number of jurisdictions in 7 others—all charged with a history of voting rights abuses–to obtain “preclearance” from the DOJ or the District Court of DC before making any changes to state election policies or procedures. Passed into law in 1965, Section 5 was enacted as an “emergency...
  • Yes, Justice Scalia: Section 5 Is a Racial Entitlement. Even DOJ Says So

    03/13/2013 10:38:47 AM PDT · by jazusamo · 13 replies
    PJ Media ^ | March 13, 2013 | J. Christian Adams
    Truth and revolution can appear suddenly, and darken the brightest of times. Consider yesterday’s Department of Justice inspector general’s report documenting the rancid racialist attitudes of the Voting Section staff. (See: “ Inspector General Report of Racialist Dysfunction Inside DOJ .”) The Justice Department should hope that Justice Antonin Scalia — or his clerks — don’t catch wind of the IG report before Shelby v. Holder is decided. If he or they do, they will find a particularly interesting discussion regarding what Justice Scalia called “racial entitlements” in Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The left has been apoplectic...
  • Schneiderman v. New York

    03/07/2013 6:58:37 PM PST · by neverdem · 4 replies
    New York Sun ^ | March 5, 2013 | Masthead Editorial
    One question hovering over the voting rights case now before the Supreme Court is whether there should have been a special counsel appointed to represent New York. The case involves the question of whether... --snip-- It used the power when, in 1965, it enacted what is, in the Voting Rights Act, one of the most glorious laws ever entered into the United States Code. It admitted African Americans to the political process and spelled the end of the Jim Crow era. Section 5 of the law, however, has been much fought over. It deals with certain states or jurisdictions that...
  • Roberts and Scalia Are Right: Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act no longer makes sense.

    03/07/2013 7:09:23 AM PST · by SeekAndFind · 30 replies
    National Review ^ | 03/07/2013 | Hans A. von Spakovsky
    Why are liberal activists exerting themselves so fervently to attack the points made by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia last week during the oral arguments in the Shelby County v. Holder case? Perhaps the justices’ critics are desperate to retain the unconstitutional preclearance provisions of the Voting Rights Act, which have given the Obama administration political and legal leverage in redistricting and other election-law challenges. The chief justice provided some reason last June, in his decision in NFIB v. Sebelius, to believe that such attacks might cause him to change his mind. But the recent attacks are...
  • Is Racism Worse in the South? Roberts's question frames the VRA case. Too bad there's no answer.

    03/06/2013 6:43:04 PM PST · by 2ndDivisionVet · 23 replies
    The New Republic ^ | March 6, 2013 | Chuck Thompson
    In the wake of last week’s Supreme Court arguments over the Voting Rights Act, the geography of racism is once again a topic of debate. None other than Chief Justice John Roberts kicked things off when he asked the act’s defenders—that would be the U.S. government—a 20-word question that brilliantly framed the entire debate: “Is it the government’s submission that the citizens of the South are more racist than the citizens of the North?” Roberts asked, pinning a very ragged tail on a very ugly donkey. Unlike most debates about this question, this one has real implications. The landmark act...
  • Jackson says Supreme Court challenge to Voting Rights Act could be "terribly damaging to democracy"

    03/05/2013 8:49:09 AM PST · by Tailgunner Joe · 16 replies
    al.com ^ | March 03, 2013 | Kim Chandler
    SELMA, Alabama -- Politicians this morning took the opportunity of the annual pilgrimage across Selma's Edmund Pettus Bridge to defend the voting rights legislation inspired by the "Bloody Sunday" confrontation there in 1965. Vice President Joe Biden is among dozens of national political figures gathered in Selma this morning, just four days after the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments challenging Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. That provision requires states with a history of discrimination to get Justice Department approval before making any change to election procedure. Alabama's Shelby County, which brought the issue to the Supreme...
  • A Ruling on Racial Progress

    02/27/2013 2:15:14 PM PST · by Kaslin
    Townhall.com ^ | February 27, 2013 | Jonah Goldberg
    I can only hope that the scourge of racism is finally purged from Stewartstown and Pinkham's Grant. These are two of 10 New Hampshire towns covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which requires local officials to get permission, or "preclearance," on any changes to their election laws. Stewartstown has just over a thousand souls in it and is 99 percent white. In 1970, when it was put under the authority of Section 5, the census listed two blacks out of its 1,008 residents. Pinkham's Grant boasts nine residents, and it must also beg Washington for...
  • Key provisions of Voting Rights Act appear in jeopardy after high court argument

    02/27/2013 10:00:52 AM PST · by ColdOne · 17 replies
    nbcnews.com ^ | 2/27/13 | Tom Curry
    Central parts of an election law dating back to the civil rights struggles of the 1960s, the Voting Rights Act, appeared to be in jeopardy Wednesday after the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a challenge to them.
  • Supreme Court to consider rolling back minority protections in Voting Rights Act

    11/09/2012 1:05:32 PM PST · by jazusamo · 12 replies
    The Hill ^ | November 9, 2012 | Sam Baker
    The Supreme Court said Friday that it will consider whether laws designed to protect minority voters are unconstitutional. The announcement comes just days after an election that demonstrated the increasing electoral clout of black and Hispanic voters, who helped propel President Obama to a second term. It's against that backdrop that the court will consider rolling back part of the Voting Rights Act, first passed in 1965, to prevent states from disenfranchising minorities. Specifically, the justices will hear a challenge to the section of the Voting Rights Act that requires certain states with a history of discrimination to get permission...