Federal appeals court overturns NC election ID law; cites "history of voting discrimination"

[56ktarget]

Show me in the Bill of Rights where it says voting is pre-existing right and not subject to government infringement.

I'll wait.

Neither are guns. For most of our history the 2nd amendment was not interpreted as a right for private citizens to own firearms.

Oops, didn't fit into the Paulite talking point.

[56ktarget]

Anything that keeps a single Boobus out of a voting booth and away from my rights and my income, is a good thing.

There you go folks. The real reason Paulites want voter id laws. Not because they want to eliminate the (nonexistent) fraud, but because they want to suppress the Democratic vote.

[asurfaholic]

There you go folks. The real reason Paulites want voter id laws. Not because they want to eliminate the (nonexistent) fraud, but because they want to suppress the Democratic vote.

Lol you got it allll figured out, dont you.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

if they require a photo id the only thing in my mind they need to do to make it non-discriminatory is to have no cost associated with obtaining a simple id.

[Peace&Freedom]

Neither are guns. For most of our history the 2nd amendment was not interpreted as a right for private citizens to own firearms.

Oops, didn't fit into the Paulite talking point.

More like it doesn't fit most of our history. "The right of the people" can hardly be re-spun to mean anything other than it is the right of the people to keep and bear arms, despite furious efforts of the gun controllers to reprogram us on the history:

In the initial phase, those demanding a bill of rights protecting free speech or any other right could not muster a majority in any convention. However, the Pennsylvania Minority proposed that “the people have a right to bear arms” to defend themselves, the state, and the United States, as well as for hunting. In the Massachusetts convention, Samuel Adams proposed that “peaceable citizens” have a right to keep “their own arms.” Finally, the New Hampshire convention became the first to propose a bill of rights, including that “Congress shall never disarm any citizen” unless in rebellion.

In Virginia’s convention, Patrick Henry argued “that every man be armed,” and George Mason drafted a declaration of rights, including a guarantee of “the right of the people to keep and bear arms...The Second Amendment was interpreted, as Federalist Tench Coxe expressed it, to guarantee the right of the people to keep and bear “their private arms.” The Senate rejected restricting the right to bear arms to “the common defense” and also rejected a proposed state power to maintain a militia....The proposed Bill of Rights was then considered for adoption by the states. No record exists of any criticism of “the right of the people to keep and bear arms,” although the militia clause was taken to task for not actually doing anything.”

http://www.independent.org/publicati...mary.asp?id=72

[devil21]

Add Wisconsin and Texas to the list of state voter ID laws overturned by the Feds right before the mid-terms.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/10/us...-law.html?_r=0

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday evening stopped officials in Wisconsin from requiring voters there to provide photo identification before casting their ballots in the coming election.

Three of the court’s more conservative members dissented, saying they would have allowed officials to require identification.

Around the same time, a federal trial court in Texas struck down that state’s ID law, saying it put a disproportionate burden on minority voters. more at link

[mad cow]

Around the same time, a federal trial court in Texas struck down that state’s ID law, saying it put a disproportionate burden on minority voters. more at link

But what about minority smokers and drinkers who just want a Swisher Sweet and a 40?

[GunnyFreedom]

if they require a photo id the only thing in my mind they need to do to make it non-discriminatory is to have no cost associated with obtaining a simple id.

We include free photo ID. And the ID part of the law was never blocked, only the same-day registration. And the overturning was just reversed by SCOTUS, so the entire law is intact again. And we gave voters 3 years to acquire their free IDs. And every single Primary and General election from the law's passage until it's requirement in 2016, every single voter is handed a list of accepted IDs and asked if they will be capable of complying by 2016, and if not they are given instructions on how to acquire their free ID.

[GunnyFreedom]

http://abc11.com/politics/opponents-...id-law/343745/

Thursday, October 09, 2014 04:51PM
RALEIGH (WTVD) -- The fallout continues after a US Supreme Court decision on key parts of North Carolina's new voting law.

The high court decided Wednesday to block a federal appeals court ruling from taking effect. It means that same-day voter registration won't be allowed during early voting, as well as out-of-precinct voting in next month's election.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/09/us...ices.html?_r=0

A trial judge declined to block the law, but a divided three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in Richmond, Va., ruled last week that the restrictions on same-day registration and counting out-of-precinct votes should be suspended.

The appeals court let stand parts of the law that imposed new voter identification requirements, cut off a week of early voting, kept polling places closed on the Saturday before the election and disallowed preregistration of 16- and 17-year-olds in high schools. Justice Ginsburg said all of those measures “likely would not have survived” scrutiny under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued a brief, unsigned order reinstating provisions of a North Carolina voting law that bar same-day registration and counting votes cast in the wrong precinct. A federal appeals court had blocked the provisions, saying they disproportionately harmed black voters.

[Lucille]

WI and TX too. A memo must have been circulated.

http://reason.com/24-7/2014/10/10/su...oter-id-law-on

The Supreme Court on Thursday night blocked Wisconsin from implementing its new voter identification law on the eve of next month's elections.

In a related action, a district court judge in Texas ruled that state's voter ID law is racially discriminatory and violates the Voting Rights Act. The state attorney general's office said it would appeal.

Both Wisconsin and Texas had claimed the new rules were intended to crack down on instances in which voters impersonate others at the polls. Such incidents are extremely rare, courts have found.

[HOLLYWOOD]

We include free photo ID. And the ID part of the law was never blocked, only the same-day registration. And the overturning was just reversed by SCOTUS, so the entire law is intact again. And we gave voters 3 years to acquire their free IDs. And every single Primary and General election from the law's passage until it's requirement in 2016, every single voter is handed a list of accepted IDs and asked if they will be capable of complying by 2016, and if not they are given instructions on how to acquire their free ID.

Wow, how accommodating for all people... political fraud hates it when you treat everyone the same. Amazes me what government requires(interferes/controls/mandates) when going about your everyday lives in private, whether it be; traveling, working, learning, partying, banking, investing, shopping, etc...tons of laws requiring ID, sometimes 2 or more forms of it, but if you want to vote in the public government system, no photo ID required. The absurdity of the Federal courts just blanketed ruling against states' ID laws, indicates, they don't want the people to take control over their government.


LOL... the SCOTUS voter ID ruling is like them ruling, 'Black people cannot work for White people below latitude 36°30′, because their was slavery 150 years ago.' This is all about the Marxist masters staying in power by giving fraud across the country to the 'Useful Idiots' aka Socialists.

[Keith and stuff]

WI and TX too. A memo must have been circulated.

http://reason.com/24-7/2014/10/10/su...oter-id-law-on

I heard in TX, you have to pay for the ID (a poll tax), unlike in NC. Is that true. In TX, you also have to have your photo and all 10 finger prints entered into the state criminal database to get a government ID. Unfortunately, NC has a government photo ID database that police access So it would seem that in TX, the freedom position would be to be against a voter ID requirement for 2 to 3 good reasons.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...forcement-use/

[GunnyFreedom]

I've lived in NC almost all my life and never gave them my fingerprints. ???

[GunnyFreedom]

Wow, how accommodating for all people... political fraud hates it when you treat everyone the same. Amazes me what government requires(interferes/controls/mandates) when going about your everyday lives in private, whether it be; traveling, working, learning, partying, banking, investing, shopping, etc...tons of laws requiring ID, sometimes 2 or more forms of it, but if you want to vote in the public government system, no photo ID required. The absurdity of the Federal courts just blanketed ruling against states' ID laws, indicates, they don't want the people to take control over their government.


LOL... the SCOTUS voter ID ruling is like them ruling, 'Black people cannot work for White people below latitude 36°30′, because their was slavery 150 years ago.' This is all about the Marxist masters staying in power by giving fraud across the country to the 'Useful Idiots' aka Socialists.

Yeah, it's totally over the top bent over backwards accommodating, which is one reason it's so annoying to hear libdems whining about disenfranchisement. Bovine. Feces.

[Keith and stuff]

I've lived in NC almost all my life and never gave them my fingerprints. ???

+Rep

You are correct. I edited my reply. NC has a government ID database that police are allowed to access. So, IMO, requiring ID to vote would be a violation of your right not to be in a state photo criminal database, when have committed no crime. I consider it a 4th Amendment issue. I'm sure many people would disagree.

[Christian Liberty]

There you go folks. The real reason Paulites want voter id laws. Not because they want to eliminate the (nonexistent) fraud, but because they want to suppress the Democratic vote.

This isn't inherently bad.

Mr. A wants to stop Mr. B from doing what he wants with his own life. Mr. B wants to be left alone.

And liberals pretend like these claims are morally and ethically equal. They aren't.

[Carlybee]

We may be screwed on the governor race in Texas. They'll be bussing in half of Mexico to vote for Wendy Davis. The Federal judge who overturned the voter ID law is conveniently Hispanic.

On Thursday, US District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos ruled the Texas law "creates an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote, has an impermissible discriminatory effect against Hispanics and African-Americans, and was imposed with an unconstitutional discriminatory purpose".

However you can bet if Dems wanted it..it would be hunky dory.

[Carlybee]

There you go folks. The real reason Paulites want voter id laws. Not because they want to eliminate the (nonexistent) fraud, but because they want to suppress the Democratic vote.

No, just want to keep them from cheating like they always do.

[Keith and stuff]

We may be screwed on the governor race in Texas. They'll be bussing in half of Mexico to vote for Wendy Davis. The Federal judge who overturned the voter ID law is conveniently Hispanic.

However you can bet if Dems wanted it..it would be hunky dory.

Texas doesn't have same day registration, right? How are people bused if they had to register ahead of time? 2 bus trips?

[Carlybee]

Texas doesn't have same day registration, right? How are people bused if the had to register ahead of time? 2 bus trips?

I was being facetious :/