Page 3 of 43 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 429

Thread: US Supreme Court strikes down voting rights act clause

  1. #21
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Anagram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    St. Louis MO
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    6,192

    Re: US Supreme Court strikes down voting rights act clause

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    If the law was Constitutional in 1964 it is still Constitutional now. If the Supreme Court is allowed to throw out Federal law passed and signed by a duly elected Congress and President on the basis of it being outdated and nothing more, I guess that means the Constitution is up for grabs as a whole.
    That's actually kind of disturbing if it's true. If the only reason they struck it down is because it's out of date, it seems like a dangerous precedent. I haven't read the decision yet so maybe there's something more there or a good reason I haven't thought of yet.
    There should be Instant Runoff Voting

  2. #22
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: US Supreme Court strikes down voting rights act clause

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    It isn't the Court's job to decide such things.
    Had they been sticking to their "job", their oath of office, they would have never rulled it constitutional in the first place. Instead, they did as they've done in the past, allowed unconstitutional acts and provisions to be constitutional in the court's eyes TEMPORARILY, in order to engage in social engineering.

  3. #23
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,887

    Re: US Supreme Court strikes down voting rights act clause

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    If the law was Constitutional in 1964 it is still Constitutional now. If the Supreme Court is allowed to throw out Federal law passed and signed by a duly elected Congress and President on the basis of it being outdated and nothing more, I guess that means the Constitution is up for grabs as a whole.
    I don't think it was challenged to the Supreme Court prior to now.

  4. #24
    Curmudgeon


    LowDown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Houston
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,566
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: US Supreme Court strikes down voting rights act clause

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    If the law was Constitutional in 1964 it is still Constitutional now. If the Supreme Court is allowed to throw out Federal law passed and signed by a duly elected Congress and President on the basis of it being outdated and nothing more, I guess that means the Constitution is up for grabs as a whole.
    The law was based on the idea that voting problems existed in certain states and counties that didn't exist in other states and counties. So those areas were subject to oversight while the others were not. Those problems disappeared long ago so it is discriminatory, unfair, unnecessary, and stigmatizing to continue to subject them to special oversight that is expensive and burdensome. Every little change in the voting process, such as moving a polling station down the street to another building, required them to get lawyers to draw up papers to be sent to Washington, DC, and then to wait up to 60 days for a reply. Very very few of the applications for changes are being denied, which lends support to the idea that the process isn't necessary any more.

    Meanwhile, it's still illegal to discriminate against minorities in the right to vote. But that won't stop radicals like Obama from demagoging the issue out the wazoo, trying to equate this with the end of voting rights.

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --HL Mencken

  5. #25
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: US Supreme Court strikes down voting rights act clause

    Quote Originally Posted by Samhain View Post
    I don't think it was challenged to the Supreme Court prior to now.
    The original act was indeed challenged (Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) and could have been ruled unconstitutional in whole or part. The challenges to this particular provision were many over the years, the SCOTUS just decided up until now not to hear those cases.

  6. #26
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,887

    Re: US Supreme Court strikes down voting rights act clause

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    The original act was indeed challenged (Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) and could have been ruled unconstitutional in whole or part. The challenges to this particular provision were many over the years, the SCOTUS just decided up until now not to hear those cases.
    That's the Civil Right Act, not the Voting Rights Act.

  7. #27
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,491

    Re: US Supreme Court strikes down voting rights act clause

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    But they still can gerrymander along partisan lines. So "We didn't put them in that district because they're black, it's because they're Democrats."
    That's section 5 not section 4.
    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.

  8. #28

  9. #29
    Teacher of All Things


    Josie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    28,358

    Re: US Supreme Court strikes down voting rights act clause

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    If the law was Constitutional in 1964 it is still Constitutional now. If the Supreme Court is allowed to throw out Federal law passed and signed by a duly elected Congress and President on the basis of it being outdated and nothing more, I guess that means the Constitution is up for grabs as a whole.
    Wait.... you don't think the Supreme Court should be able to strike down laws that Congress passed and the President signed years ago? Are you sure you want to go down that path?


  10. #30
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,491

    Re: US Supreme Court strikes down voting rights act clause

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    I also wonder if conservatives who don't think it's appropriate to (re-)interpret the Constitution with modern reality in mind will object to this.
    SCOTUS reunterpretted the constitution in this case?
    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.

Page 3 of 43 FirstFirst 1234513 ... 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
  •