- Joined
- Aug 27, 2005
- Messages
- 43,602
- Reaction score
- 26,256
- Location
- Houston, TX
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
The Supreme Court announced Monday it has struck down an Arizona law that required voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship before registering to vote. In Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council, seven justices agreed that the Arizona law oversteps the state's authority by essentially invalidating the federal voter registration form. The form, established by a 1993 law, lets people register to vote by sending in a uniform document accepted by all states. Voters must swear they are citizens on the form.
In a 2004 ballot initiative, Arizona voters decided they wanted to go beyond that federal requirement, by asking for proof of citizenship--such as a birth certificate, passport, or tribal ID card--at the point of voter registration.
Critics of the Arizona law argued that it stripped some voters of their ability to vote, since some civil rights groups estimate that about 13 million citizens do not have documentary proof of their citizenship. The law's supporters said it would guard against any attempts by non-citizens to vote in federal elections. Three other states had similar laws and joined in on the case.
In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme court has struck down a law that disenfranchised voters in Arizona. Justice Scalia wrote the majority opinion, and John Roberts was also a part of the majority decision.
Well done, Supremes.
Article is here.
Yeah, why should voting be limited only to US citizens? :roll:
Eventually, the rightwing GOP will have to come to terms with the people in the mainstream if they intend to survive as a party. Gerrymandering, voter oppression, redrawing district lines, and any other "competitive edge," they have been counting on will not stand the tests of time, (or the Supreme Court either, it seems.)
Yeah, why should voting be limited only to US citizens? :roll:
It is limited to US citizens. We're you under the impression this has changed?
It would be funny if AZ turns around and eliminates voting in the Presidential elections by people altogether. People forget there is no Constitutional right to vote for President. States can delegate that to the legislature and leave the people out completely.
It changed today, have you been taking a vacation from the news? The SCOTUS just ruled we cannot require that we check citizenship. Any asshat who can fill out a form, we just take their word for it.
It would be funny if AZ turns around and eliminates voting in the Presidential elections by people altogether. People forget there is no Constitutional right to vote for President. States can delegate that to the legislature and leave the people out completely.
It would be funny if AZ turns around and eliminates voting in the Presidential elections by people altogether. People forget there is no Constitutional right to vote for President. States can delegate that to the legislature and leave the people out completely.
Huh. Who could have predicted this outcome? The Supreme Court is highly unpredictable in its decisions sometimes
This is not true. There are other checks that occur at various stages in the process. They vary by state.
Yes, yes it is.
It is limited to US citizens. We're you under the impression this has changed?
When I was in high school there was this one ****ty little bar in town that was...less than consistent...in carding for purchases of alcohol.
As you might expect I did a fair share of my underage drinking at that bar.
Now, I was born in 1970 so by the time I got to high school the legal drinking age was 21.
You see how that works?
Drinking was limited to folks 21 years of age and older, but since nobody was looking we regularly took advantage of the fact and drank, despite what the law said.
There's an old saying that "locks are made to keep honest people out".
The same can probably be said for unenforced laws.
Without actually establishing by some simple, rudimentary process that folks showing up at the polling place are actually legally entitled to vote, or kids showing up at the bar are actually legally entitled to drink, how else would we enforce the laws that underly the legitamacy of either action?
This is not true. There are other checks that occur at various stages in the process. They vary by state.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?