The LuLac Edition #2455, June 25th, 2013
THE SUPREME COURT STEPPING BACK
The U.S. Supreme Court voted today and tore away a provision of the 1965 Civil Rights Act that was in place for over 50 years. The High Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act. That provision of the landmark civil rights law that designates which parts of the country must have changes to their voting laws cleared by the federal government or in federal court. The 5-4 ruling, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, ruled in Shelby County v. Holder The justification was that “things have changed dramatically” in the South in the nearly 50 years since the Voting Rights Act was signed in 1965.
Wanna bet? This provision ensured that v1oting jurisdictions that had a history of embedded racism would abide by the law of the land. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg expressed it best when she wrote, “The 2006 reauthorization makes abundantly clear [that] second-generation barriers to minority voting rights have emerged in the covered jurisdictions as at¬tempted substitutes for the first-generation barriers that originally triggered preclearance in those jurisdictions." President Obama weighed in on the decision: I am deeply disappointed with the Supreme Court’s decision today. For nearly 50 years, the Voting Rights Act – enacted and repeatedly renewed by wide bipartisan majorities in Congress – has helped secure the right to vote for millions of Americans. Today’s decision invalidating one of its core provisions upsets decades of well-established practices that help make sure voting is fair, especially in places where voting discrimination has been historically prevalent. As a nation, we’ve made a great deal of progress towards guaranteeing every American the right to vote. But, as the Supreme Court recognized, voting discrimination still exists. And while today’s decision is a setback, it doesn’t represent the end of our efforts to end voting discrimination. I am calling on Congress to pass legislation to ensure every American has equal access to the polls. My Administration will continue to do everything in its power to ensure a fair and equal voting process.
Congressman Matt Cartwright made this statement: I am deeply disappointed with the Supreme Court’s decision today. For nearly 50 years, the Voting Rights Act – enacted and repeatedly renewed by wide bipartisan majorities in Congress – has helped secure the right to vote for millions of Americans. Today’s decision invalidating one of its core provisions upsets decades of well-established practices that help make sure voting is fair, especially in places where voting discrimination has been historically prevalent.
Just as a reminder, this was one of the reasons why the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (with all of its provisions) was passed.
posted by David Yonki @ 6:19 PM
9 comments
9 Comments:
"Voting discrimination still exists. Some of my supporters could only vote once."
-Chicago Community Organizer
So are we ignoring the the fact that the decision was based on data from 1965 and current data indicates that federal permission is no longer needed?
Why is it we give trophies to everyone for just "showing up" but refuse to acknowledge social and political progress that is anything LESS than PERFECT? People aren't perfect.
Were are you on the "war on coal"?
How come all the advances on clean coal are ignored?
How come we have better numbers than the Kyoto Accord proposed and no one says a word?
How come we let Russia and China ignore their global warming contributions, say nothing and let them laugh at us?
How come NEPA lets itself get bamboozled when coal and gas can help us out of this poverty?
How come no one wants to acknowledge the success happening in N. Dakota?
How do we get this economy rolling without cheap energy?
Eric Holder found the Philadelphia Black Panthers innocent of "voter intimidation" at the polls so I think he should agree with the Supreme's ruling.
It occurred to me that some readers (and a select Prof) might question my Kyoto observation. I should have included this link.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/05/usa-meets-kyoto-protocol-without-ever-embracing-it/
Hopefully I got it in time.
You majored in Poli-sci right?
You should know and embrace the concept that questions that may be untouchable for the political class aren't immune from the Court's scrutiny.
Today it determined that some of the Voting Rights Amendment's heavy-handed protections that were necessary nearly five decades ago no longer apply.
You response is seemingly the typical liberal one. Come on back to your old thoughtful ways Yonk.
Now I'm hearing there will be "hearings" starting next week about ways to shore up the voting act.
How about you finish your damned hearings into the true voter suppression done by this current crop of crooks using every unconstitutional regulatory body the feds have to intimidate those who know their ideology sucks.
Good morning Students,
I hope that you all enjoyed a wonderful weekend of your usual drinking, philandering and participating in other forms of debauchery. I myself had a very enjoyable time with some good friends from the banking industry at one’s home in New England (I shall not reveal the exact locale for fear of my life). I would recommend to anyone who cares to experience sailing off the coast. Despite the rabid heat, being out amongst the ocean with the cool breeze (even in the most humid conditions), the scent of salt water and the beautiful sunshine is an experience akin to Heaven itself. The conversation and (as usual) the food was nothing less than outstanding. But alas, here we are again in this God-forsaken room.
The work of this classroom moves forward…….
“Civil rights is a moral issue. You cannot legislate morality.” Those, Students, are the words of the late Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater, spoken in 1964. Goldwater, author of one of the great political books, “Conscience of a Conservative” was correct. I bring this up because of the historic Supreme Court decision of yesterday which struck down provision 4 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Basically, for all intents, Prov. 4 was in itself a racist move. Singling out only specific States for federal oversight and dictating how those various States enact their respective voting laws/procedures. Students, if anything racked of discrimination Prov. 4 did (and I am elated to use the word “did” because now it is no longer so).
Now, am I denying the injustices that occurred in the South in the 1960’s??? Of course not!!!!!!!!! The atrocities that were committed were uncalled for. Yet, what the media will not tell you is that poll after poll was taken in that part of the country at that time and in the majority of the results of these various surveys of White Southerners the opinion was in favor of letting Blacks (called Negroes then) the full right to vote. But this has been lost to history. My point, class is to stress that equality of voting was as sure a thing in the South in 1964 WITHOUT GOVT. or JUDICIAL INTERVENTION as you ingrates getting stoned this weekend. The same applies to Slavery 100 years before. It is common historical fact that the Plantation owners were coming to the realization in the late 1850’s that it was less expensive to free their slaves and let them work for pay and board rather than to “own” them. Had we been patient then and waited a bit longer, the Civil War would have been averted, the slaves would have been freed willingly by their owners and the animosity which has existed between South and North to this day would never have occurred.
Patience is a virtue. For all those who are predicting the return of poll taxes, KKK rallies and cross burnings because of a simple Supreme Court decision, I say “Don’t make me laugh.” Time will prove me right. And I congratulate Justices Alito, Thomas, Scalia, Kennedy and the normally inept Chief Justice Roberts for guiding us to this wonderful example of the virtue of patience and the decency of mankind and his ability to police himself without governmental and judicial intervention. I only can hope that later today they show the same courage where the issue of Gay Marriage is concerned.
Indeed, a great day for freedom and America.
Something to think about this morning………
Class Dismissed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The great shtick of the GOP where Democratic Presidential appointments to the SCOTUS is concerned was to urge the President to choose Justices “who did not legislate from the bench, but interpret the law’. Yesterday’s decision to strike down Provision 4 and basically paralyze Provision 5 of the Voting Rights Act proves that it is the GOP appointed Justices who are doing the legislating. And the decision equally proves that elections have consequences.
Most people when voting for a President don’t even consider the Judiciary, let’s look at the last 29 years. In bad times they vote their pocket books (1992, 2008) and in good times afford themselves the luxury of voting for the “guy they most want to have a beer with” (1984, 1988, 2000). Ironically all of the Justices who voted to strike down Provision 4 were appointed by the Presidents elected in these “luxury vote” years. Consequences. Usually these “luxury vote” Presidents end up imploding in office. Reagan left office with a high popularity rating, yet left us with an exploding deficit and a credit card (we’ll pay later) government. Two things he railed against in his 1980 campaign. His successor George HW Bush paid the price for that as recession drove him from office after one term. I don’t need to go into the details of George W. We all know them.
SO, now we are left to return in a way to the “state’s rights” era. I feel it shall be very difficult for a Democrat to secure victory in states such as Virginia, North Carolina or Florida from now on. These three states which Presidential/congressional wise were trending Democrat in recent years (although to be fair Obama lost NC this past year) will now be so cut up, so Gerrymandered, that Democratic victories will be all but impossible in congressional races. When you factor in the different polling rules they shall enact, such as polling hours etc. , well say goodbye to the Dem winning the electoral votes of those states in the Presidential contest.
So, here we are.
Several years ago, the Roberts Court opened the door for limitless corporate donations to campaigns. Now we have opened the door to limitless gerrymandering, knit picking, and sheer trickery in these Southern states. It isn’t that there is no recourse for a voter who feels disenfranchised. The problem is, now that Provision 4 is shot down, the offended voter, or would be voter cannot act until after the election. That is the kicker.
SO when a Republican opens his/her mouth complaining about Jurists legislating from the bench, simply tell them that you agree. Because the GOP appointees have been doing quite a good job of it and it needs to stop-----along with Gerrymandering (which is basic legalized trickery).
God Bless.
Today in sports news, former New England Patriot charged with Murder and a Browns Rookie charged with attempted Murder with the victim in critical condition!
And decades ago they used to call the Oakland Raiders Bad Boys!
The Pats have immediately released the player and the Browns have no need for a rookie camp signee in this kind of trouble.
Athletes as role models? NO!
Disgusted
Post a Comment
<< Home