Court Reinstates Texas Voter ID Requirement, Allowing State to Enforce Law This Election

The first official thing illegal immigrants do once they enter the US is attempt to participate in local and national elections.

 

Actually there is a point of critical mass where illegal immigrants being voting. Whether it's 15 million, 20 million, or 50 million we don't really know. Only bobmarley knows the figure from his extensive research on the subject. It's something we have to be prepared for because... illegals!

 

There is one thing on the internet I have learned; You can find someone on any subject to agree with your agenda. However, this doesn't make them right.

For starters, none of our constitutional rights are "subjected to reasonable restrictions". Its black and white, no grey. That is the whole point of the constitution. On the flip side, you can't hide absurdity behind constitutional rights, such as claiming nuclear bombs fall under the second amendment or screaming "fire" and claim rights under the first amendment.

If the constitution granted rights to vote, then you wouldn't need the 15th, 19th, 24th or 26th. Perhaps you should revisit those amendments. None of those amendments grants anyone the right to vote. They specifically state certain groups can not be excluded from voting. If you do not understand the difference between granting vs excluding, you probably shouldn't carry on with this subject.

So essentially, a state can exclude anyone from voting except based on sex, race, color, age restriction or paying a poll tax.

Some current restrictions that can be found:
-requirement of registration
-illegals
-not having an ID
-incarceration record
-requirement to live in a state for a determined period of time
-insane/mentally ill/r****dation

 

excellent post!!!

 

If there's anything that I've learned on the internet is that anyone can claim to know the Constitution better than a Harvard educated professor of Constitutional Law. Nice job.

Anyway I would love for you guys to put in your platform that American citizens don't have the right to vote. Please do so, I think that's a great idea for you guys. Get that to Ted Cruz ASAP.

 

I'm pretty sure this either a speech from "The Paper Chase" or "Dumb and Dumber" - not sure which.

 

if you vote by mail they can't check your ID.

 

So no reasonable restrictions, besides the reasonable restriction?

 

All you need to know about voting fraud brought to you by the plutocrats, their Supreme Court and the little guy dupes who worry about voter fraud.

<iframe width="640" height="390" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/8GBAsFwPglw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Meh ... when South Africa instituted their voter ID law, the democratic process was brand new in that country and the IEC (Independent Electoral Commission permanent body created by the constitution to promote and safeguard representative democracy in South Africa) had an actual credibility problem. They viewed voter IDs as a method to prove fairness in elections.

The credibility debate with the US voting and representation system center around the electoral college, and the influence of money and lobbyists in the political process.

Same way the right argued that gun control legislation didn't "solve" Columbine, they should be arguing that this legislation doesn't "solve" electoral process credibility.

 

Not getting the relevance.

I don't think I want to go with the party who says I don't have a right to vote. So, even if your argument was a good one -- and I don't think it is -- I'd oppose you anyway. If the Constitution really says I don't have a right to vote, throw it in the trashcan.

 

The question was the irrelevant part. You claimed that buying a gun REQUIRED that ID is shown. My experience is that your claim is 100% false.

WTF are you talking about?

 

You claimed that the Constitution did not grant a right to vote. I provided a site which highlighted the opinion of a Harvard educated constitutional law scholar that claimed the opposite and now you threw out the equivalent of a six year old saying "nuh-uhhhhhh."

You just pointed out two "reasonable restrictions" to constitutional rights, invalidating your "black and white, no grey" statement. I love it when posters get hoisted by their own petards.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/09/voting-right-or-privilege/262511/

This is the link you apparently chose to ignore. Since I know you will choose not to click on the provided links, here is the section from a CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SCHOLAR...

"But if the Constitution has to say "here is a specific right and we now guarantee that right to every person," there are almost no rights in the Constitution. Linguistically, our Constitution is more in the rights-preserving than in the right-proclaiming business. The First Amendment doesn't say "every person has the right to free speech and free exercise of religion." In the Second, the right to "keep and bear arms" isn't defined, but rather shall not be "abridged." In the Fourth, "[t]he right of the people to be secure ... against unreasonable searches and seizures" isn't defined, but instead "shall not be violated." In the Seventh, "the right of (civil) trial by jury" -- whatever that is -- "shall be preserved." And so on.

In those terms, it ought to mean something that the right to vote is singled out more often than any other. Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment imposes a penalty upon states that deny or abridge "the right to vote at any [federal or state] election ... to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, ... except for participation in rebellion, or other crime." The Fifteenth states that "[t]he right of citizens of the United States to vote" can't be abridged by race; the Nineteenth says that the same right can't be abridged by sex; the Twenty-Fourth says that "the right of citizens of the United States to vote" in federal elections can't be blocked by a poll tax; and the Twenty-Sixth protects "[t]he right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote.""

And, as constructed, the current crop of Voter ID laws amount to a poll tax because they require that a person purchase an ID after jumping through hoops that could cost even more money.

I'm not certain that you even have a salient point, perhaps you could try to make one in your next post.

 

I found that sentence quite amusing as well. There is no grey area. There is, however, a dull, metallic colored area, apparently.

 

Priceless.

 

The Court won’t interrupt Texas voter ID law

In a stinging defeat for the Obama administration and a number of civil rights groups in a major test case on voters’ rights, a divided Supreme Court told the state of Texas early Saturday morning that it may enforce its strict voter ID law for this year’s general election, with early voting starting next Monday. Three Justices dissented from the ruling, which was released a few minutes after 5 a.m. following a seemingly lengthy study.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/10/court-wont-interrupt-texas-voter-id-law/