E46Fanatics

E46Fanatics (http://forum.e46fanatics.com/index.php)
-   Political Talk (http://forum.e46fanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=61)
-   -   Voting Rights Act Decision (http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.php?t=973559)

rapier7 02-28-2013 10:46 AM

Voting Rights Act Decision
 
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...n_AboveLEFTTop

I'm in the states' rights camp on this argument. The era of Jim Crow is over. And the "voter suppression" charges that Democrats love to accuse the Republicans of doing is a shadow of a sliver compared to the actual institutional segregation of the South in the 60s that legitimately prevented blacks from voting.

The fact that current Federal statute explicitly treats certain states and municipalities as inferior (which once again underscores the futility of the "equal protection" clause of the 14th Amendment) due to a history of racism is pretty outrageous. It's comparable to the EU forcing Germany to pay a "Holocaust tax" due to Hitler and Nazi Germany's barbaric actions 70 years ago (fictional example).

On legal grounds, I think it would be judicial activism if the Supreme Court struck down certain sections of the Voting Rights Act, but I think Congress should stop reauthorizing the portions of the Act that require certain jurisdictions to submit their election law and regulations for approval in Federal courts.

Do you guys think we still need that part of the Voting Rights Act?

casino is no lie 02-28-2013 10:59 AM

Either keep it in place or move towards Federally set election laws that all States must abide by. Voter suppression is a reality and it was evident in tactics used by the GOP in 2012.

bimmerfan08 02-28-2013 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by casino is no lie (Post 15205878)
Either keep it in place or move towards Federally set election laws that all States must abide by. Voter suppression is a reality and it was evident in tactics used by the GOP in 2012.

Aren't you just so bitter?

Rhumb 02-28-2013 11:13 AM

The Jim Crow era may be over, but all the myriad guises of voter suppression is still very much alive. It may well be, today, a sliver of what it once was, but that says far more about how pervasive and institutional it once was than anything else. It still is very much an active ans serious problem today. This is not some relic from the past but an active law that today is protecting and preserving the Constitutional rights of many voters across the U.S. Shelby County, AL, one of the plaintiffs, has even just recently been cited for various voting rights violations.

States and municipalities were singled out arbitrarily but rather, because of endemic and pervasive voting rights violations. Nor is this some permanent Scarlet Letter lingering from a bygone era. States and municipalities can come out from under their voting rights Act obligations upon showing a history free of violations. Should they continue, today, to violate, as has Shelby County, then they rightfully and duly remain under its obligations until such time that they evidence due regard for voters rights. The "equal protection" clause of the 14th Amendment adheres to individuals, not states or localities per se. That these states and localities were, and still are, violating individual voting rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution, it was and is entirely appropriate for the federal government to assure that these individual's rights are duly protected, hence the Voting Rights Act.

I would agree with Rapier that it would be undue judicial activism, to borrow that rather vague phase, to undo an act of Congress that was just very recently overwhelmingly reaffirmed (2007?). SCJ Scalia had some rather disturbingly broad comments impugning the motivation of Congress in reauthorizing this legislation with vast bi-partisan majorities that would open the door to the SC passing judgement on pretty much any legislation based upon presumption of malice in motivation alone. Any ruling should be far more factual and hinge solely on actual violation of the Constitution. I don't think there is, and that the Voting Rights Act is still a current, viable, effective and Constitutional piece of law, but its the opinion of nine other folks that matters.

casino is no lie 02-28-2013 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bimmerfan08 (Post 15205912)
Aren't just so bitter?

Do you even English?

Rhumb 02-28-2013 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by casino is no lie (Post 15205878)
Either keep it in place or move towards Federally set election laws that all States must abide by. Voter suppression is a reality and it was evident in tactics used by the GOP in 2012.

There are indeed broader parts (Section 7?) of the Voting Rights Act that do essentially apply across the nation, but also specific targeted parts (Section 5?) that preemptively apply to states and municipalities that have a factual proven record of voter rights suppression in all its various forms, be they overtly (poll taxes, literacy rules) or more subvertly (too many to list, which is the very point of this provision).

However, the long list of recent significant violations indicates that this is a present problem that still requires being addressed by all the appropriate sections of the Voting Rights Act. Of course, should states evidence a compliance with the provisions of the Voting Rights Act, they can then be relieved of Section 5 requirements.

PS, this isn't specifically a southern states issue as various municipalities in other areas of the country fall under the various provisions too, even if southern state are by far the most egregious offenders past and present.

Lair 02-28-2013 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by casino is no lie (Post 15205878)
Either keep it in place or move towards Federally set election laws that all States must abide by. Voter suppression is a reality and it was evident in tactics used by the GOP in 2012.

Yes, but now they want those tactics to work.

bimmerfan08 02-28-2013 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by casino is no lie (Post 15205924)
Do you even English?

:rofl: fixed. I blame my phone.

NFRs2000nyc 02-28-2013 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bimmerfan08 (Post 15205993)
:rofl: fixed. I blame my phone.

Obamaphone?:lmao:

casino is no lie 02-28-2013 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bimmerfan08 (Post 15205912)
Aren't you just so bitter?

What's there to be bitter about. My guy won again.

bimmerfan08 02-28-2013 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by casino is no lie (Post 15206009)
What's there to be bitter about. My guy won again.

Chicago has the highest sales tax?

bimmerfan08 02-28-2013 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc (Post 15206000)
Obamaphone?:lmao:

I don't qualify for handouts. :eeps:

casino is no lie 02-28-2013 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bimmerfan08 (Post 15206026)
Chicago has the highest sales tax?

To my knowledge (9.25%). Not sure how that pertains to voter suppression and the Voting Rights Act.

mtgswede 03-02-2013 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by casino is no lie (Post 15205878)
Either keep it in place or move towards Federally set election laws that all States must abide by. Voter suppression is a reality and it was evident in tactics used by the GOP in 2012.

Someone forgot to take their meds. If you look at facts from the 2012 election you'll find numerous examples of voter turnout that exceeded the number of registered voters and all of them are in districts that Obama won. There are numerous examples of democrat election judges refusing to allow republican judges access as required by law. Wonder why? If the GOP is suppressing votes they sure suck at it.

Furthermore, every election cycle you hear about how the democrats are deliberately trying to suppress overseas ballots for our military. In 2012, they sent out absentee ballots after the deadline. They do crap like this all the time. Do tell me again how it is the GOP and not the Dems that try and suppress the vote?

5ynd1cat3 03-02-2013 10:24 AM

1. GOP suppresses vote

2. Democrats commit voter fraud

3. ??????

4. Profit

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Bimmer App

Lair 03-02-2013 06:46 PM

So many accusations, so little proof.

Act of God 03-03-2013 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lair (Post 15212939)
So many accusations, so little proof.

I know, voter suppression is a myth. At this point, not allowing early and late voting 5 days before and after election day = voter suppression. How dare you expect people to vote on election day!!!

Lair 03-03-2013 07:48 AM

I was talking to swede.

I should just take his word for it, right?

rdsesq 03-03-2013 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rapier7 (Post 15205832)
Do you guys think we still need that part of the Voting Rights Act?

Yes. The substantive standard still need apply. To think that voting "irregularities" based on some protected factor, be it race, religion, gender, etc, do not exist in this country is silly. There should be wider observation/evaluation of locations and factors. I side with the arguments that the specific coverage formula rather than that the substantive standard need not apply.

phrozen06 03-03-2013 11:43 AM

http://redroom.com/files/images/Edmu...ossing%202.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gDNnf2-QEv...600/pettus.jpg


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
(c) 1999 - 2011 performanceIX Inc - privacy policy - terms of use