• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

John Lewis: Supreme Court ruling " a dagger into the heart of voting rights act"

Smeagol

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
4,147
Reaction score
1,694
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
John Lewis: Court's Decision Puts 'Dagger in Heart of Voting Rights Act' - ABC News

John Lewis is not just a congressman, he was a civil rights leader at the forefront of supporting voting rights. He had skull smashed by a policeman while trying to cross Edmund pettis bridge in Selma Alabama on Bloody Sunday.

Its in my opinion truly concerning in light of irregularities in the 2012 election and sworn testimony by the former Florida GOP Party Chairman that strategy meetings were held not log ago to come up with ways to keep minorities from voting, despite them backfiring in their faces.

If I'm not mistaken, couldn't all this be addressed by coming up with a single set of guidelines and procedures that applied to all states, not just the handful of southern states the Voting Rights Act addressed in the 1960s?
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
73,241
Reaction score
41,753
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Its in my opinion truly concerning in light of irregularities in the 2012 election and sworn testimony by the former Florida GOP Party Chairman that strategy meetings were held not log ago to come up with ways to keep minorities from voting, despite them backfiring in their faces.

If I'm not mistaken, couldn't all this be addressed by coming up with a single set of guidelines and procedures that applied to all states, not just the handful of southern states the Voting Rights Act addressed in the 1960s?

Not without constitutional amendment.

Edit: Woops my bad, I found the provision for the possible federal override of state congressional election laws in article 1, section 5 of the constitution. This was affirmed by the SCOTUS decision of Foster v. Love in 1997.
 
Last edited:

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
John Lewis: Court's Decision Puts 'Dagger in Heart of Voting Rights Act' - ABC News

John Lewis is not just a congressman, he was a civil rights leader at the forefront of supporting voting rights. He had skull smashed by a policeman while trying to cross Edmund pettis bridge in Selma Alabama on Bloody Sunday.

What happened to him has nothing to do with whether a town has to get approval from the Justice Department or a federal court just to move a polling station a block in one direction or another in most of the South. As I indicated previously here, had Hurricane Sandy come through the South the week before the election, that would have disenfranchised people more than having to show an ID because of the VRA.


If I'm not mistaken, couldn't all this be addressed by coming up with a single set of guidelines and procedures that applied to all states, not just the handful of southern states the Voting Rights Act addressed in the 1960s?

In theory, but it would never pass when places like Ohio and Pennsylvania and other swing states suddenly are subject to new restrictions like have been imposed on the South. It will just be an issue of how to blame the GOP for it failing to pass.
 

head of joaquin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
12,029
Reaction score
3,530
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Clearly the last best hope of the GOP and their shills on the Supreme Court is to disenfranchise minority voters. The demographics require it if the GOP is to survive as anything but a regional southern party spouting racist code.

But this will backfire. I expect this attack on minorities will energize civil rights activism and mean the GOP will lose even bigger and quicker in the future.
 

DAKitty

Banned
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
34
Reaction score
20
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
"...the federal government can no longer treat some jurisdictions differently because of discrimination that may have ended decades ago."

Seems pretty reasonable to me.
 

Gina

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
Messages
44,019
Reaction score
29,303
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Not without constitutional amendment.

Can you explain that? You mean after this ruling?

That is contrary to this statement by the court.
"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," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in the court's opinion.

To me that says the congress needs to act and the suggestion by smeagol would seem to be a huge step in that direction. Encumber all states equally.

To the OP, I think his fears are well founded.
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,847
Reaction score
33,760
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So, the Congress, that is the Congress as it exists in 2013, has to come up with a new voting rights act? Really?
I wonder if they will come up with yet another bill that requires the use of a fork lift to move it around, or if a furniture dolly will do the job?

Who in Congress is going to even read the bill, should one be passed?

Even the reporter in the little video from the OP used the right word: dysfunctional.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
73,241
Reaction score
41,753
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Can you explain that? You mean after this ruling?

That is contrary to this statement by the court.


To me that says the congress needs to act and the suggestion by smeagol would seem to be a huge step in that direction. Encumber all states equally.

To the OP, I think his fears are well founded.

Would this still be your opinion with a GOP congressional majority and a GOP president? Just what changes in election laws would you suggest be made? I firmly agree that any federal election "meddling" should be equal for all states, yet with gerrymandering voting districts you can basically go three ways - packing as many "X" voters into "X" majority districts as possible, dispersing "X" voters among as many districts as possible assuring that they remain as powerless as possible or using a strict geographical grid/population system and let the chips fall where they may. ;)
 

Gina

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
Messages
44,019
Reaction score
29,303
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Would this still be your opinion with a GOP congressional majority and a GOP president? Just what changes in election laws would you suggest be made? I firmly agree that any federal election "meddling" should be equal for all states, yet with gerrymandering voting districts you can basically go three ways - packing as many "X" voters into "X" majority districts as possible, dispersing "X" voters among as many districts as possible assuring that they remain as powerless as possible or using a strict geographical grid/population system and let the chips fall where they may. ;)

Honestly, not,since many of the current majority GOP house members are there due to the gerrymandering of the districts from which they were elected. I think they would be sorely tempted to spread that example nation wide, which is, I imagine, what the opposition to today's ruling fear will be the case anyway.
 

AlabamaPaul

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
8,834
Reaction score
2,812
Location
Alabama
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Honestly, not,since many of the current majority GOP house members are there due to the gerrymandering of the districts from which they were elected. I think they would be sorely tempted to spread that example nation wide, which is, I imagine, what the opposition to today's ruling fear will be the case anyway.

This meme is so ludicrous. How do you explain the 2010 election results where the districts were those based on the 2000 census. Eliminating gerrymandering of districts would cause many progressive heads to literally explode because it's why so many are elected...
 

hfd

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
675
Reaction score
104
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Has anyone lost their right to vote?
 

humbolt

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
26,666
Reaction score
17,776
Location
SW Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
This meme is so ludicrous. How do you explain the 2010 election results where the districts were those based on the 2000 census. Eliminating gerrymandering of districts would cause many progressive heads to literally explode because it's why so many are elected...
All in all, maybe not a bad outcome. I wonder if they go "pop", or just go "flut".
 

JayDubya

Struggler
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
17,181
Reaction score
4,037
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Sometimes bad things need a dagger into their hearts.
 

ARealConservative

cookies crumble
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
14,518
Reaction score
3,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Clearly the last best hope of the GOP and their shills on the Supreme Court is to disenfranchise minority voters. The demographics require it if the GOP is to survive as anything but a regional southern party spouting racist code.

But this will backfire. I expect this attack on minorities will energize civil rights activism and mean the GOP will lose even bigger and quicker in the future.

apparently the only hope for progressives is to allow rampant cheating at the polls. the progressive cause is so weak, something as simple as requiring citizen checks completely crushes their efforts, so they have to fight tooth and nail to prevent it.
 

davidtaylorjr

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
6,775
Reaction score
1,123
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Clearly the last best hope of the GOP and their shills on the Supreme Court is to disenfranchise minority voters. The demographics require it if the GOP is to survive as anything but a regional southern party spouting racist code.

But this will backfire. I expect this attack on minorities will energize civil rights activism and mean the GOP will lose even bigger and quicker in the future.

It is ridiculous to think this hurts minority voters.
 

ARealConservative

cookies crumble
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
14,518
Reaction score
3,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
It is ridiculous to think this hurts minority voters.

I imagine homeless voters would be effected by much larger numbers then any other demographic, but that alone does not warrant allowing a system that is powerless to prevent fraud from occurring.
 

davidtaylorjr

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
6,775
Reaction score
1,123
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I imagine homeless voters would be effected by much larger numbers then any other demographic, but that alone does not warrant allowing a system that is powerless to prevent fraud from occurring.

Homeless voters are hurt by their circumstance. How would you even know what precinct to let them vote in?
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,928
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,928
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I imagine homeless voters would be effected by much larger numbers then any other demographic, but that alone does not warrant allowing a system that is powerless to prevent fraud from occurring.

Homeless folks won't be affected at all because they're probably not registed to vote.
Let's use some common sense for a second.
 

ARealConservative

cookies crumble
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
14,518
Reaction score
3,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Homeless folks won't be affected at all because they're probably not registed to vote.
Let's use some common sense for a second.

how is that common sense? you are speculating.

common sense says a certain percentage of homeless registered to vote but no longer have state issues id.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,928
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
how is that common sense? you are speculating.

common sense says a certain percentage of homeless registered to vote but no longer have state issues id.

Homeless people either aren't registered to vote, or don't vote. I doubt that many, if any of them will be affected by voter ID laws. Plus, if they're receiving government assistance, they DO have a photo ID.
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,847
Reaction score
33,760
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Homeless people either aren't registered to vote, or don't vote. I doubt that many, if any of them will be affected by voter ID laws. Plus, if they're receiving government assistance, they DO have a photo ID.

That's right.
Moreover, the SCOTUS decision doesn't say anything about voter ID anyway, does it? Doesn't it just say that the states can change voting procedures without Uncle Sam looking over their shoulders?

I can see where that would have disenfranchised black people in the South back in '65. Today, not so much, which is what the SCOTUS said.
 
Top Bottom