Judge strikes down Kansas law requiring proof of citizenship to vote

[Swordsmyth]

A federal judge has ruled Kansas cannot require proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote, a setback for Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach in a case with national implications for voting rights.U.S. District Judge Julie Robinson sided with voters Monday that Kansas cannot require people who register to vote to provide documents such as a birth certificate, U.S. passport or naturalization papers. The decision in a couple of consolidated cases makes permanent earlier temporary rulings.
The judge said the Kansas requirement violates the right to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Kobach, a conservative Republican running for governor, had to prove at trial that Kansas had a problem with noncitizens voting.
An appeal is likely, but an appeals court had previously backed Robinson’s preliminary injunction.


https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...itizenship-st/

[aGameOfThrones]

The amount of things where you have to prove you’re a US citizen are so numerous, yet for voting is not one of them.

[Swordsmyth]

Kansas officials are continuing to enforce a proof of citizenship law that a federal judge recently deemed unconstitutional.
The Topeka Capital-Journal reported Wednesday that staff for Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach has directed county clerks to continue requiring voters to present documentary proof of citizenship.
One county clerk said she was instructed to continue enforcing the policy "as we have been."
Danedri Herbert, a spokeswoman for Kobach, told the news outlet that state officials still need time to fully understand the court’s ruling on the law. She argued that the judge did not provide a clear timeline for when Kobach had to instruct county clerks to implement the policy.

“I think ‘immediately’ is kind of open to interpretation,” she told the Capital-Journal.

More at: http://thehill.com/homenews/state-wa...that-was-ruled

[oyarde]

By 2018 in amerika you will have to present a birth certificate to your license branch in order to take a domestic airline , ever . That is OK but not to vote ? Something wrong there.

[timosman]

By 2018 in amerika you will have to present a birth certificate to your license branch in order to take a domestic airline , ever . That is OK but not to vote ? Something wrong there.

When did the government become so trusting?

[Swordsmyth]

Gov. Jeff Colyer said Thursday that he thinks the state has a good chance of winning an appeal of a federal court ruling striking down a state law requiring people to show proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote, especially now that Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt’s office has taken over the case. “I think the attorney general will do a fine job, and I intend to win this. I think it’s an opportunity for us to win this thing,” Colyer told reporters Thursday.
The attorney general’s office filed an entry of appearance and formal notice of appeal on Secretary of State Kris Kobach’s behalf earlier this week. Both documents were signed by Solicitor General Toby Crouse. Throughout the trial of the case, Kobach himself had defended the lawsuit, along with other attorneys in his office.
“As was contemplated from the start of this case, and as is provided by law, the attorney general’s office has assumed the role of lead counsel for the state’s appeal in defense of the voter-registration statute that the district court in Fish v. Kobach declared unconstitutional and in violation of the National Voter Registration Act,” Schmidt’s office said in an email statement. “The attorney general has conferred with the secretary of state, who has agreed to provide such assistance on appeal as may be requested by the attorney general.”
The statement went on to say that the attorney general’s office is only handling the appeal of the district court’s decision in that case and not the sanctions that the trial judge imposed on Kobach for his conduct during the trial.
“All further proceedings in the district court, including any required reporting to the court, remain the responsibility of the secretary of state’s office,” the statement read.

More at: http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2018/ju...ntends-to-win/

[Anti Federalist]

Curious, what, exactly, is being violated?


Amendment XIV

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4.

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5.

The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

[Aratus]

Andrew Johnson tried to potus*veto the 14th Amendment, but had accepted the 13th one...




This was one of the reasons why he had to face a senate trial. impeachment is very political.

[oyarde]

There have been no problems with the Indiana law that I know of .

[nobody's_hero]

Curious, what, exactly, is being violated?


Amendment XIV

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4.

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5.

The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Civil Rights act. It says that black people compared to whites are too dumb to know how to prove they are citizens and therefore racism. Just be sure I'm gonna throw in a "JIM CROW!!!" shout. Anything else I can clarify?

[dannno]

U.S. District Judge Julie Robinson sided with voters

Are people who can't prove their US citizenship SUPPOSED to be voters??

[nobody's_hero]

Are people who can't prove their US citizenship SUPPOSED to be voters??

If you can prove citizenship to vote, it makes you suspicious. No one should go through that much effort to vote. I mean, a driver's license? You mean to tell me you learned to drive just so you can vote? I call bullsh*t. Driving is racist anyway.

[juleswin]

The amount of things where you have to prove you’re a US citizen are so numerous, yet for voting is not one of them.

When was the last time someone asked you to show proof of citizenship in the last 12 months? how many times and for what reasons?

[Swordsmyth]

When was the last time someone asked you to show proof of citizenship in the last 12 months? how many times and for what reasons?

That is irrelevant, there are many things that require it whether they happen often or not.

Voting is the number one thing that should, voting can kill, voting can unjustly imprison, voting can steal, voting is one of the most dangerous activities on the planet.

[aGameOfThrones]

When was the last time someone asked you to show proof of citizenship in the last 12 months? how many times and for what reasons?

I will neither accept or deny that I applied for a FL CWL in the last 12 months. I will neither accept or deny that it was my only time or reason to state to a government body that I'm a lawful U.S. Citizen.

[oyarde]

When was the last time someone asked you to show proof of citizenship in the last 12 months? how many times and for what reasons?

When I went to renew my drivers license on June 04 . They asked for passport or birth certificate .

[juleswin]

I will neither accept or deny that I applied for a FL CWL in the last 12 months. I will neither accept or deny that it was my only time or reason to state to a government body that I'm a lawful U.S. Citizen.

Ok, I probably wouldnt have any problem with showing drivers license but proof of citizen seems a bit excessive. Hmm, maybe they can somehow put it in your drivers license so you can only show a license which almost everybody has and carries around with em

[oyarde]

In Indiana you will show your license to vote . If you do not have a license you can obtain instead a state ID to vote for free . To get both of these you are going to need about a dozen forms of ID .

[juleswin]

When I went to renew my drivers license on June 04 . They asked for passport or birth certificate .

I have renewed by license a ton of times and I don't remember anyone asking me for my proof of citizenship.

[oyarde]

I have renewed by license a ton of times and I don't remember anyone asking me for my proof of citizenship.

Starting Jan 01 2020 I think you have to have a Real ID License to take a domestic flight . To get that you have to show birth certificate or Passport. You can register to vote too while you are there if you are a citizen .

[Swordsmyth]

Ok, I probably wouldnt have any problem with showing drivers license but proof of citizen seems a bit excessive. Hmm, maybe they can somehow put it in your drivers license so you can only show a license which almost everybody has and carries around with em

So you want an irrelevant document (unless the state only issues DLs to citizens) instead of the relevant documentation?

[Swordsmyth]

I have renewed by license a ton of times and I don't remember anyone asking me for my proof of citizenship.

Then it is worthless for proving that you have a right to vote.

[oyarde]

Indiana voter ID Law has been on the books about 13 or 14 years I think .

[oyarde]

Here it is a given that dems will vote more than once if you let them and non citizens only vote for one party.

[juleswin]

So you want an irrelevant document (unless the state only issues DLs to citizens) instead of the relevant documentation?

Keyword here is renewed my licence. I had to show my green card, my birth certificate when I got my license originally. I wouldn't call it completely useless. Just have an area to say if said holder showed enough doc to prove their citizenship on the card and then start using it to prove citizenship.

[oyarde]

I am not seeing anything in this kansas law the Supreme Court has not already upheld as legal.