Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 123

Thread: Supreme Court raises doubts about Voting Rights Act

  1. #11
    Professor
    vendur's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    06-05-13 @ 08:35 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,250

    Re: Supreme Court raises doubts about Voting Rights Act

    This sins of the father garbage is completely un-american; more importantly, it's completely unconstitutional. sadly, I have little faith in the court that claims the government can force anyone to buy anything at any time ever coming down on the side of the constitution.

  2. #12
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,647

    Re: Supreme Court raises doubts about Voting Rights Act

    Quote Originally Posted by vendur View Post
    This sins of the father garbage is completely un-american; more importantly, it's completely unconstitutional. sadly, I have little faith in the court that claims the government can force anyone to buy anything at any time ever coming down on the side of the constitution.
    It's quite valid. There's a great many things minorities, especially if they have been long-term minorities, can expect, and that will include rights being diminished. If I was told that, for instance, that the ADA is no longer needed because everyone is cool with people with disabilities, I would fight tooth and nail against its removal-strictly because generational memory is quite instructive about the dangers involved and would rather not place my faith that the American people are actually better​ than their forefathers.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  3. #13
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,317

    Re: Supreme Court raises doubts about Voting Rights Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    I'm leery of the argument that "times have changed." I see it as a potential excuse for dramatic alterations against minority rights. I don't raise that argument for gun rights, I won't raise that argument for voting rights.
    So, that means that your ok with the ghetto system that is created and made legal by Section 5 of the Civil Rights Act? Racial gerrymandering, basically? Election rigging?

    Personally, I'm not ok with it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  4. #14
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,317

    Re: Supreme Court raises doubts about Voting Rights Act

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    I agree. Times have not changed. Here in Houston, Hubert Vo, a Vietnamese American, won a Congressional seat years ago by 17 votes, and has won subsequent elections by wide margins. He was supported by the Houston Vietnamese community. Rick Perry and his cronies attempted to carve this district up and make it parts of 3 different districts, thus depriving the Vietnamese community of a voice in government. The courts used Title 5 of the Voting Rights Act to declare the Texas map that got rid of this district unconstitutional. There were also other Texas districts that were gerrymandered out of existence, which violated Title 5, and were part of the court decision. So, yes, the Voting Rights Act needs to stay.

    Better yet would be a law which states that you cannot have a district that is gerrymandered at all, and districts must have a ratio of it's boundaries no larger than 3:1.
    This is the self contradictory post of the century.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  5. #15
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,317

    Re: Supreme Court raises doubts about Voting Rights Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    I'm not suggesting that those currently would want to do it, but specific wording of each decision carries meaning, and can be used against the spirit of intentions. For the issue of civil rights, the most dangerous idea is that a given protection is declared antiquated.
    That kind of echoes the concerns of the people that lock their doors when a group of black dudes walk by. Just sayin'
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  6. #16
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Supreme Court raises doubts about Voting Rights Act

    I have no objections to extending the VRA to the entire nation. The Northern states were a far cry from perfect with regard to discrimination, and it shouldn't be allowed anywhere.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  7. #17
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,069

    Re: Supreme Court raises doubts about Voting Rights Act

    the states have ****ed up elections enough that i would welcome federal oversight in every state. extend the VRA to cover every state, and expand the hell out of it. additionally, the artificially long lines should count as a poll tax, because that's exactly what they are. anyone trying to stand in the way of voting belongs in jail, in my opinion.

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    SE Asia
    Last Seen
    07-12-14 @ 10:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,333

    Re: Supreme Court raises doubts about Voting Rights Act

    I also think it should be applied to all states equally.

  9. #19
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,923
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Supreme Court raises doubts about Voting Rights Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Pilot View Post
    Supreme Court raises doubts about Voting Rights Act


    If we're going to keep Preclearance, it needs to apply to everyone, not just select states and counties. Things have changed and I don't see how theses select Southern areas are so much more likely to attempt discriminatory voting practices that they should be singled out.
    As long as there is gerrymandering, jury rigging the results of elections way before the first vote is cast, this nation will never have fair elections. I think gerrymandering should also be looked at by the SCOTUS. I will add another item to this discussion, the minority majority district's. These districts actually help the Republicans as the majority of minorities who normally vote for democrats can all be placed into one district leaving the rest more white and more republican than what would be if you split up minorities around the state. Here in Georgia putting most of the blacks into 4 districts guarentees the election of 4 black Democrats, that leaves 9 other districts which only one white democrat was elected along with 8 white republicans. If John Barrow runs for the senate here in Georgia in 2014, look for the republicans to pick up his seat. I would say having 9 out of 13 house seats in republicans hands, I am sure they are more than willing to let the 4 majority black districts stand.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  10. #20
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: Supreme Court raises doubts about Voting Rights Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    As long as there is gerrymandering, jury rigging the results of elections way before the first vote is cast, this nation will never have fair elections. I think gerrymandering should also be looked at by the SCOTUS. I will add another item to this discussion, the minority majority district's. These districts actually help the Republicans as the majority of minorities who normally vote for democrats can all be placed into one district leaving the rest more white and more republican than what would be if you split up minorities around the state. Here in Georgia putting most of the blacks into 4 districts guarentees the election of 4 black Democrats, that leaves 9 other districts which only one white democrat was elected along with 8 white republicans. If John Barrow runs for the senate here in Georgia in 2014, look for the republicans to pick up his seat. I would say having 9 out of 13 house seats in republicans hands, I am sure they are more than willing to let the 4 majority black districts stand.
    That was a result of a deal between the dems and the GOP much to the chagrin of suburban liberals who found themselves in red districts. I believe Mother Jones referred to the deal as one of the most unholy political alliances ever in politics, or something along those lines.

Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •