• 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!

Supreme Court strikes down Arizona voter ID citizenship law

This is the point right! Anything for power. Better to lead a 3rd world has been country then a capitalist shining star at the top of a hill.


Next up, blanket amnesty, and the United States is changed forever. Republicans will never win another election.
 
Wow, modified Godwin, way to go.

The Ayatollahs just smiled, they're happy to see your support of the ruling council.

You actually believe that John Roberts and Antonin Scalia are Ayatollahs? LMAO.
 
You seriously think the state doesn't do any verification at all?

SCOTUS just ruled that the states cannot check for anything the feds don't tell them to check for.
 
Whoa, yeah, I do/did forget that. Of course, shortly thereafter, before the next national election, SCOTUS would just manufacture one. They don't seem tied to the Constitution. They're at the we can make any **** up we want, as long as we're creative enough.

But is the Supreme Court part of the judicial branch, one of the three branches of government outlined by the constitution?

I find it ironic that when liberals complain about the Supreme Court it is over its membership but conservitives seem annoyed at its very existance.
 
I live in Madiganistan and I am unaware of any checks whatsoever here.

Be honest: you've never actually checked. You didn't ever look up the details of the process.
 
You actually believe that John Roberts and Antonin Scalia are Ayatollahs? LMAO.

Yes, I believe the SCOTUS has become a ruling council. They perform precisely the role the Ayatollahs perform in Iran.
 
Yes, I believe the SCOTUS has become a ruling council. They perform precisely the role the Ayatollahs perform in Iran.

Actually, the Supreme Court is part of our system of checks and balances, designed to keep a group of crazies from running over the Constitutional rights of others. Seems that, in this case, the system is working good.
 
Yes, I believe the SCOTUS has become a ruling council. They perform precisely the role the Ayatollahs perform in Iran.

Except that Supreme Court justices are appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate. Ayatollahs are a different sort of problem.
 
Too late.
Next up, blanket amnesty, and the United States is changed forever. Republicans will never win another election.
 
The voting precinct is not your shady ass bar. If you think no checking is done at all, why do you think there is even a registration process? Why not just let anyone wander in and vote?

And what do you think gutting registration will do?
 
Not happy about the ruling but don't think its a judicial activism. In nutshell, they're saying the federal law supercedes that of the state's. Solution to the problem, change the federal law.

This ruling is a knife with two edges. What they've done here as well is nullified any possibility of a state saying citizenship is not required to vote which a few have been toying with that idea.
 
Be honest: you've never actually checked. You didn't ever look up the details of the process.

I registered to vote, I helped my daughter register. That's an interesting story. It was 2000 and my daughter had just turned 18. We are obviously Jewish and the woman taking the form gaily said to my daughter, "Just think, your first vote will be for Joe Lieberman!" When my daughter replied, "ummm, errrr, not really...." the lady lost her temper and threatened to tear up the registration form rather than process it.
 
this decision was about can the state of AZ, ask for I.D. when a person is registering to vote......

the answer is .....no ...........according to the USSC


My understanding is the case is about whether a state can add their own requirements, without federal input.

It seems the answer is no.

However:

News from The Associated Press

While the court was clear in stating that states cannot add additional identification requirements to the federal forms on their own, it was also clear that the same actions can be taken by state governments if they get the approval of the federal government and the federal courts.

Arizona can ask the federal government to include the extra documents as a state-specific requirement, Scalia said, and take any decision made by the government on that request back to court. Other states have already done so, Scalia said.

The Election Assistance Commission "recently approved a state-specific instruction for Louisiana requiring applicants who lack a Louisiana driver's license, ID card or Social Security number to attach additional documentation to the completed federal form," Scalia said.​
 
SCOTUS just ruled that the states cannot check for anything the feds don't tell them to check for.

... And there are things the Feds tell them to check for.
 
Next up, blanket amnesty, and the United States is changed forever. Republicans will never win another election.

The United State of America will change its name to North Mexico.
 
I registered to vote, I helped my daughter register. That's an interesting story. It was 2000 and my daughter had just turned 18. We are obviously Jewish and the woman taking the form gaily said to my daughter, "Just think, your first vote will be for Joe Lieberman!" When my daughter replied, "ummm, errrr, not really...." the lady lost her temper and threatened to tear up the registration form rather than process it.

But you didn't ask what they do after you leave the building.
 
My understanding is the case is about whether a state can add their own requirements, without federal input.

It seems the answer is no.

However:

News from The Associated Press

While the court was clear in stating that states cannot add additional identification requirements to the federal forms on their own, it was also clear that the same actions can be taken by state governments if they get the approval of the federal government and the federal courts.

Arizona can ask the federal government to include the extra documents as a state-specific requirement, Scalia said, and take any decision made by the government on that request back to court. Other states have already done so, Scalia said.

The Election Assistance Commission "recently approved a state-specific instruction for Louisiana requiring applicants who lack a Louisiana driver's license, ID card or Social Security number to attach additional documentation to the completed federal form," Scalia said.​

you are correct, ..i just went to the heart of the matter, on what AZ was doing.
 
Why should it be limited to humans?

Hell why should we be limited to one vote?

Rome here we come

"Vote early and vote often." :lol: It's the Chicago Way!
 
It is limited to US citizens. We're you under the impression this has changed?

I'm talking mainly about a mentality.
 
My understanding is the case is about whether a state can add their own requirements, without federal input.

It seems the answer is no.

However:

News from The Associated Press

While the court was clear in stating that states cannot add additional identification requirements to the federal forms on their own, it was also clear that the same actions can be taken by state governments if they get the approval of the federal government and the federal courts.

Arizona can ask the federal government to include the extra documents as a state-specific requirement, Scalia said, and take any decision made by the government on that request back to court. Other states have already done so, Scalia said.

The Election Assistance Commission "recently approved a state-specific instruction for Louisiana requiring applicants who lack a Louisiana driver's license, ID card or Social Security number to attach additional documentation to the completed federal form," Scalia said.​


Yep. Another way to tell the States to keep in line. If they are all supposed to be the same, you have to wonder how long till there is just one.
 
Surely nobody would lie about being a citizen.
 
you are correct, ..i just went to the heart of the matter, on what AZ was doing.

It will be interesting to see what happens with the provision in the voter registration law that requires applicants to swear under penalty of perjury that they are US Citizens.

Will there be much defense of the law put up by the authorities having jurisdiction?

How will election commissions know if voters have willfully purjured themselves in their applications?
 
Actually, the Supreme Court is part of our system of checks and balances, designed to keep a group of crazies from running over the Constitutional rights of others. Seems that, in this case, the system is working good.

I am very familiar with what they were supposed to be and what they have become instead. Noted that you feel comfortable with a ruling council.
 
Surely nobody would lie about being a citizen.

40+ years when I registered for the first time, I had to present my birth certificate. It seemed pretty routine at the time.
 
Back
Top Bottom