Yep: Justice Department suing Texas over voter ID law

posted at 5:01 pm on August 22, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

Back in June, the Supreme Court struck down a big part of the Voting Rights Act as unconstitutional, ruling that Congress needs to identify places where racial discrimination at the voting booth is so endemic that it requires federal intervention to override a state’s sovereignty in conducting elections. The 1965 law originally required that states with a history of discrimination apply for DOJ permission or court approval before altering their voting laws, but the Justices threw out those 50-year-old definitions and essentially freed Texas from federal court supervision — and it didn’t take long for Attorney General Eric Holder to declare that he had no intention of abiding by the historical checks-and-balances norm supplied by the Supreme Court.

Now, the follow-through; here’s the DOJ statement:

The Department of Justice announced today that it will file a new lawsuit against the State of Texas, the Texas Secretary of State, and the Director of the Texas Department of Public Safety over the State’s strict voter photo identification law (SB 14). The United States’ complaint seeks a declaration that SB 14 violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, as well as the voting guarantees of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

Separately, the Department is filing a motion to intervene as a party and a complaint in intervention against the State of Texas and the Texas Secretary of State in the ongoing case of Perez v. Perry (W.D. Tex.), which concerns the state’s redistricting laws. The United States had already filed a statement of interest in this case last month. Today’s action represents a new step by the Department in this case that will allow the United States to formally present evidence about the purpose and effect of the Texas redistricting plans.

“Today’s action marks another step forward in the Justice Department’s continuing effort to protect the voting rights of all eligible Americans,” said Attorney General Eric Holder. “We will not allow the Supreme Court’s recent decision to be interpreted as open season for states to pursue measures that suppress voting rights.  The Department will take action against jurisdictions that attempt to hinder access to the ballot box, no matter where it occurs.  We will keep fighting aggressively to prevent voter disenfranchisement. We are determined to use all available authorities, including remaining sections of the Voting Rights Act, to guard against discrimination and, where appropriate, to ask federal courts to require preclearance of new voting changes.  This represents the Department’s latest action to protect voting rights, but it will not be our last.”

This whole rumpus originally got started, of course, because Texas wanted to change its election laws and require identification to vote, i.e., institute voter-ID laws — or, as progressives deem this simple and logical policy, The Most Obviously Racist and Discriminatory Idea of the Modern Age. As Charles Krauthammer put it a few weeks ago, “I think he’s got a very weak case.” More details from SCOTUSblog here.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Yep: Justice Department suing Texas over voter ID law

This case should be thrown out for lack of standing.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 22, 2013 at 5:05 PM

Bring it, jackass!

squint on August 22, 2013 at 5:05 PM

Honest elections to Democrats are like garlic to Dracula.

Wonder why that is?

/

Del Dolemonte on August 22, 2013 at 5:05 PM

This case should be thrown out for lack of standing.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 22, 2013 at 5:05 PM

It should be, but Holder is a a two-part member of the Class of the Perpetually-Aggrieved (federal government official and black) and thus has automatic standing.

Steve Eggleston on August 22, 2013 at 5:07 PM

Still no word on the DOJ lawsuit against the Black Panthers swinging clubs outside the Philly voting center, how’s that coming along?

Helllooooo? Hello? DOJ?

Bishop on August 22, 2013 at 5:07 PM

If Holder wants to protect someone may I suggest a trip to Afghanistan where he can dive on a hand grenade.

Charlemagne on August 22, 2013 at 5:08 PM

Obama brags about ‘bypassing congress’ at will and legislates from his desk as close to violating the separation of powers clause of the Constitution as he can get without being sued by congress.

Now, his racist henchman, Eric Holder, sues every state that tries to keep their elections honest and clean using voter ID laws to be certain that only those people who are eligible to vote actually vote in their elections in spite of the Supreme Courts decision on the issue allowing states to do exactly that.

This administration is awash in scandal. IRS, NSA, Benghazi, et al.

When will ENOUGH from this administration BE ENOUGH? When will congress act?

thatsafactjack on August 22, 2013 at 5:09 PM

In other words…

“…we will only attempt to enforce laws that have potential to keep us in power, and nevermind about those other pesky Rights…”

You know like 1st, 2nd, 4th, ALL OF THEM!!!

PermanentWaves on August 22, 2013 at 5:11 PM

how does a guy who is currently operating in contempt of the house have standing to do anything?

DanMan on August 22, 2013 at 5:12 PM

When will ENOUGH from this administration BE ENOUGH? When will congress act?

thatsafactjack on August 22, 2013 at 5:09 PM

They won’t, or they would have done it by now. Castrated or complicit, the result is the same.

squint on August 22, 2013 at 5:13 PM

Eric “My People” Holder and the Department of Injustice strike again.

jukin3 on August 22, 2013 at 5:14 PM

You need your ID for obama’care’.

Btw, an ID, a driver’s lic. doesn’t prove that you are eligible to vote. It proves only that you have the ID.

YOU need more than that…just saying.

Schadenfreude on August 22, 2013 at 5:14 PM

“We will not allow the Supreme Court’s recent decision to be interpreted as open season for states to pursue measures that suppress voting rights.”

Couldn’t he have just as easily have said :“We will not allow the Supreme Court’s recent decision to be interpreted as open season for states to pursue measures that kill kittens suppress voting rights.”

They are both as equally valid statements.

socalcon on August 22, 2013 at 5:15 PM

When will congress act?

thatsafactjack on August 22, 2013 at 5:09 PM

When we throw most all out in 2014, alas.

Schadenfreude on August 22, 2013 at 5:15 PM

“I’m sorry, you can’t enter the Robert F. Kennedy Department of Justice Building to lodge a complaint about Texas’ Voter ID Law unless you can show me a government issued photo ID!”

Another Drew on August 22, 2013 at 5:16 PM

The attacks on the various states, the Constitution and the de-industrialization of America continues unabated.

I can’t believe that there’s more than a few thousand knuckleheads in this country that still have any respect for the O.

Dr. ZhivBlago on August 22, 2013 at 5:16 PM

If the Department of InJustice can do whatever it wants, then why can’t Texas? Screw ‘em!

txhsmom on August 22, 2013 at 5:17 PM

Maybes they should of ask’n the Night Stick Wielding Black Panthers for there ID’s too!!

canopfor on August 22, 2013 at 5:18 PM

Wasn’t a similar Indiana law already upheld by SCOTUS?

besser tot als rot on August 22, 2013 at 5:18 PM

When we throw most all out in 2014, alas.

Schadenfreude on August 22, 2013 at 5:15 PM

You can replace the deck chairs on the Titanic all you want, this ship is still going in the drink.

squint on August 22, 2013 at 5:19 PM

And the reason to halt voter ID by the liberals?

They want Texas as a democrat state. They tel us everything they plan to do.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/democrats-launch-plan-to-turn-texas-blue-86651.html

dthorny on August 22, 2013 at 5:19 PM

Notes from Texas to:

Eric Holder: F*CK YOU.

D o Justice: F*CK Y’ALL.

Obama Admin: F*CK ALL Y’ALL.

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:19 PM

All I can say is; BRING IT,CHUMPS! And, unless you get the Supreme Court itself to strike down the Voter ID laws, any attempt to stop its implementation will be ignored and/or resisted as needed. Personally, I’d be willing to go to jail over it if they try to stop it without a Supreme Court ruling.

michaelo on August 22, 2013 at 5:19 PM

“Today’s action marks another step forward in the Justice Department’s continuing effort to protect the voting rights of all eligible Americans,” said Attorney General Eric Holder.

And a voter will prove this eligibility in what way that will satisfy a Democrat and prevent voter fraud?

Or are those mutually-exclusive goals here?

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:20 PM

When will congress act?

thatsafactjack on August 22, 2013 at 5:09 PM

When we throw most all out in 2014, alas.

Schadenfreude on August 22, 2013 at 5:15 PM

As if elections actually matter anymore.

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:22 PM

Next thing you know, Holder will be stopping states from clearing their rolls of now-dead voter names.

Oh, wait…!

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:23 PM

DOJ is so politicized that I assume this is part of trying to get out the black vote in Texas in 2014.

However, Texans won’t take well to it. Republican Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is running for governor, this suit is an outright contribution to his campaign.

obladioblada on August 22, 2013 at 5:23 PM

squint and Midas, which part of “alas” did you not understand?

Schadenfreude on August 22, 2013 at 5:25 PM

Department of Injustice.

TheDriver on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

When will ENOUGH from this administration BE ENOUGH? When will congress act?

thatsafactjack on August 22, 2013 at 5:09 PM

Not until they are personally threatened and then it will be too late.

Here we have Holder flipping the middle finger to the Supreme Court of the United States. I am pretty sure they can find him in contempt and lock him up, doubly so, since he’s in contempt of congress.

Will they send the marshals after him? Whatever does happen to someone in contempt of the Supreme Court? Subordinate courts often have draconian punishments for it. I can’t imagine the top court in the land having less!

Or maybe Roberts has no balls either.

dogsoldier on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

This whole rumpus originally got started, of course, because Texas wanted to change its election laws and require identification to vote, i.e., institute voter-ID laws

Not true. A number of republican leaders are on record and on tape claiming the primary reason for voter ID is to prevent voters who generally vote democrat from voting. That is a fact. Why else would you think college ID’s with photos aren’t valid IDs but gun permits without photos are??

Democrats will do the same thing too if they felt most minorities or college students were all of a sudden voting republican.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

Based on the recent SCOTUS decision, this case should be thrown out for lack of jurisdiction. I think Holder is just trying to delay Texas’ voter I.D. law past another election – the 2014 midterms.

TarheelBen on August 22, 2013 at 5:27 PM

This is worth going to ‘civil war’ over.

I was hoping it could be avoided ….. : (

listens2glenn on August 22, 2013 at 5:27 PM

Lets see. Section two says you cannot some up with a voting law that is harmful against minorities. Ok, except the Supreme Court has already decided in Crawford vs Marion County that requiring photo ID laws are not racist. Soooo, good luck with that Holder.

Zaggs on August 22, 2013 at 5:29 PM

squint and Midas, which part of “alas” did you not understand?

Schadenfreude on August 22, 2013 at 5:25 PM

Alask me no questions, I’ll tell you no lies. ;)

squint on August 22, 2013 at 5:29 PM

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

Student IDs are not valid and should not be valid for one simple reason. Students may vote in their home state. That is where they SHOULD vote.

I am unaware of any republican saying they wanted to suppress the vote of dems. Provide links to credible sources.

dogsoldier on August 22, 2013 at 5:30 PM

MeanWhile,back at RINO Ranch:

Former Sec. of State Colin Powell blasts North Carolina’s voting law, says it will diminish GOP – @politico

1 hour ago from http://www.politico.com by editor
===============================================

8-22-2013…2:51PM EDT

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/colin-powell-north-carolina-voting-law-95813.html?hp=r1

canopfor on August 22, 2013 at 5:30 PM

Eric “Pardon me” Holder obviously has a lot of free time on his hands.

GarandFan on August 22, 2013 at 5:30 PM

TarheelBen on August 22, 2013 at 5:27 PM

Ed wrote about this a couple weeks ago. Holder doesn’t have much of a chance and Texas will tell him to engage in an impossible act.

dogsoldier on August 22, 2013 at 5:31 PM

squint and Midas, which part of “alas” did you not understand?

Schadenfreude on August 22, 2013 at 5:25 PM

I understand ‘alas’ quite well, actually. I don’t think your phrasing means what you thought it meant, however. :)

In the spirit of the comity of the HotAirian Senate, I’ll graciously accept the fault of the miscommunication as my own.

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:32 PM

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

Your sources for that are either Raw Story and/or Americablog, right? Both are liberal sites.

The guy who said that is not a Republican official, he’s not anyone in the Texas government.

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:32 PM

A number of republican leaders are on record and on tape claiming the primary reason for voter ID is to prevent voters who generally vote democrat from voting. That is a fact.
loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

Please provide links to said statements and tapes.

GarandFan on August 22, 2013 at 5:32 PM

Or maybe Roberts has no balls either.

dogsoldier on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

They’ve got something on Roberts; he won’t do shit.

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:33 PM

squint on August 22, 2013 at 5:29 PM

:)

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:32 PM

:)

No time for absolutes :)

The ship is sinking too fast.

Schadenfreude on August 22, 2013 at 5:33 PM

Here’s the disconnect the people they are crying about already have some form of legal ID. They have to have it to get any form of Federal assistance (SNAP, welfare, WIC, LIHEAP, TANIF,_________). This nothing but a smokescreen to allow those not eligible to vote to vote.

chemman on August 22, 2013 at 5:33 PM

He’s sending a message that it will be alright for the Black Panthers to start showing up Texas. And when they do, the race war that they’re hoping for will begin.

patman77 on August 22, 2013 at 5:34 PM

loveofcountry, I told you this before.

Your nom is a huge misrepresentation.

Plus, you are a leftard derailment.

Schadenfreude on August 22, 2013 at 5:34 PM

A number of republican leaders are on record and on tape claiming the primary reason for voter ID is to prevent voters who generally vote democrat from voting. That is a fact.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

If it’s a fact, can you please provide some credible links? Just saying it doesn’t make it fact.

Just did a quick search and found a total of 3 Republicans in 2 states who might have claimed that. But that’s too tiny a sample to profile and stereotype an entire Party with!

Del Dolemonte on August 22, 2013 at 5:35 PM

A number of republican leaders are on record and on tape claiming the primary reason for voter ID is to prevent voters who generally vote democrat from voting. That is a fact.
loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

If anything like that exists, you’ll find them saying the want to curtail voter fraud. If *you* associate ‘voter fraud’ with people ‘who generally vote democrat’, well – I wont argue with ya, but that’s quite different than someone saying their goal is to illegally suppress legitimate democrat voters.

Evidence, if you please; thanks in advance.

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:37 PM

They’ve got something on Roberts; he won’t do shit.

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:33 PM

Indeed…but what marks him terribly for history is that he didn’t expose them and take responsibility for what they have…not vote in the illegal obama’care’ by modifying the law.

He is the lowest of all national scum, lower than obama, if that is possible.

Schadenfreude on August 22, 2013 at 5:37 PM

I am unaware of any republican saying they wanted to suppress the vote of dems. Provide links to credible sources.

dogsoldier on August 22, 2013 at 5:30 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XreSZvgdZwA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87NN5sdqNt8

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:37 PM

Wasn’t a similar Indiana law already upheld by SCOTUS?

besser tot als rot on August 22, 2013 at 5:18 PM

Yes, a 2005 case called Crawford v. Marion County Election Board. It was a 6-3 decision with Stevens writing the majority opinion.

Holder knows his lawsuit is destined to fail. He’s just attempting to delay the Texas law past another election.

TarheelBen on August 22, 2013 at 5:37 PM

Not true. A number of republican leaders are on record and on tape claiming the primary reason for voter ID is to prevent voters who generally vote democrat from voting. That is a fact. Why else would you think college ID’s with photos aren’t valid IDs but gun permits without photos are??

Democrats will do the same thing too if they felt most minorities or college students were all of a sudden voting republican.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

.
Did those Republicans explain how, and in what way it would suppress legal Democrat voters?

Can you explain how, and in what way it would suppress legal Democrat voters?

listens2glenn on August 22, 2013 at 5:37 PM

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

Where is a link to the tape. You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts.

I can enter into the speculation also. Members of the Democratic party leadership are on tape stating the reason they don’t want Voter ID is that it will stop the dead from voting. That’s a fact.

chemman on August 22, 2013 at 5:38 PM

No time for absolutes :)

The ship is sinking too fast.

Schadenfreude on August 22, 2013 at 5:33 PM

Indeed! :)

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:38 PM

Evidence, if you please; thanks in advance.

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:37 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XreSZvgdZwA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87NN5sdqNt8

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:38 PM

Just did a quick search and found a total of 3 Republicans in 2 states who might have claimed that. But that’s too tiny a sample to profile and stereotype an entire Party with!

Del Dolemonte on August 22, 2013 at 5:35 PM

http://americablog.com/2013/06/republican-party-doesnt-want-black-people-to-vote-per-texas-tea-party-leader.html

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/04/texas-tea-party-leader-gop-doesnt-want-black-people-to-vote/

What this guy reportedly said, and later clarified, is no different than the RNC and Republican elites freezing out Conservatives. He also did NOT say voter ID is a planned or intended way to stop blacks from voting.

He does not speak for Republicans; nor conservatives; nor really the Tea Party. Though the articles paint him as a “Tea Party leader”. Which is funny, because we don’t have ‘leaders’.

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:40 PM

Yes republicans want to keep Democrats from voting… twice…

sandee on August 22, 2013 at 5:40 PM

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:37 PM

I did not hear either one of those speakers say they were for holding back any voters.

I did hear them say with fair voting Romney stood a chance.

Barred on August 22, 2013 at 5:42 PM

Notes from Texas to:

Eric Holder: F*CK YOU.

D o Justice: F*CK Y’ALL.

Obama Admin: F*CK ALL Y’ALL.

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:19 PM

Our sentiments in NW Florida are exactly the same!

Doomsday on August 22, 2013 at 5:42 PM

So when Holder is done suing Texas about their redistricting efforts (in the story as well), will he be suing Illinois for OUR redistricting efforts subverting the “will of the people”? The Democrats in power effectively erased the +4 pick up the GOP had in the House in the 2012 election by gerrymandering incumbent GOP members of the House into each other’s districts because they hold all three branches of government locally.

Full disclosure, IL is losing one of our seats because of population flight, so they subtracted three from the GOP pick up and enough people could leave that we lost the fourth.

SUCH BS!!!!

TheHitman on August 22, 2013 at 5:42 PM

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:37 PM

Neither of those videos says a word about minorities. What they infer is that voter ID worked to cut election fraud.

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:43 PM

I can enter into the speculation also. Members of the Democratic party leadership are on tape stating the reason they don’t want Voter ID is that it will stop the dead from voting. That’s a fact.

chemman on August 22, 2013 at 5:38 PM

If that is true, then those democrats are just the same as those republicans who are on tape saying the reason they want voter ID is simply to decrease the other sides chances of winning. Both are wrong. I am yet to see a tape of a democratic leader admitting that though.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:43 PM

Yes republicans want to keep Democrats from voting… twice…

sandee on August 22, 2013 at 5:40 PM

.
But that’s still suppressing votes ….. even if they are illegal.

listens2glenn on August 22, 2013 at 5:43 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XreSZvgdZwA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87NN5sdqNt8

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:38 PM

Ok, seriously, don’t be an idiot. Voter ID push is *only* about preventing voter fraud – those guys are stating that it *works*; there is no overt statement, as you’re trying to say, that the intent is to illegitimately deny ‘democrats’ their vote.

*BZZZZZZZZZZZZZT* Thanks for playing.

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:43 PM

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:43 PM

Come on. You are not that naive are you? You do know these are all politicians right? Their number one goal is win elections. Period. And they will do or say anything to achieve that goal.

They will sell out the folks who vote for them in a heart beat if it benefits them politically or financially.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:45 PM

If that is true, then those democrats are just the same as those republicans who are on tape saying the reason they want voter ID is simply to decrease the other sides chances of winning. Both are wrong. I am yet to see a tape of a democratic leader admitting that though.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:43 PM

Lie. Provide evidence that that is simply the goal – nothing you’ve provided yet does so. Until then, shut your f*cking lie-filled mouth.

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:46 PM

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:45 PM

Are you that liberal that you see ‘stopping voter fraud’ is somehow ‘code’ for suppressing minority votes as you accused in your first post to this thread?

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:47 PM

Over the past two decades there have been numerous examples of voter fraud absent a proper photo ID…

Can anyone provide proof positive of any group of US citizens being denied the Right to vote under law…i.e. voter suppression as claimed by the Justice Department?

Have seen allegations, have heard of rumors…have heard the meme since the 1960′s…but…c’mon…any proof?

or does this particular Department of Justice no longer require proof or evidence?

Nevermind…they don’t.

coldwarrior on August 22, 2013 at 5:47 PM

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:43 PM

Come on. You are not that naive are you? You do know these are all politicians right? Their number one goal is win elections. Period. And they will do or say anything to achieve that goal.

They will sell out the folks who vote for them in a heart beat if it benefits them politically or financially.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:45 PM

And you are demonstrably a liar. What’s *your* excuse?

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:47 PM

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:43 PM

So those who vote for the guy you don’t like must have something fraudulent going on right? Tough to believe someone else can have a different political opinion from you right?

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:49 PM

Hopefully this pisses off SCOTUS enough to strike down the whole goddamn thing.

crrr6 on August 22, 2013 at 5:49 PM

And you are demonstrably a liar. What’s *your* excuse?

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 5:47 PM

loveofcountry was dropped on his head … a lot.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 22, 2013 at 5:49 PM

Dems want nothing more than election fraud. They live on it, promote it and look the other way. That is how they exist.

rjoco1 on August 22, 2013 at 5:50 PM

“This represents the Department’s latest action to protect voting rightsDemocrat cheaters, but it will not be our last.”

Fixed.

Christien on August 22, 2013 at 5:51 PM

Are you that liberal that you see ‘stopping voter fraud’ is somehow ‘code’ for suppressing minority votes as you accused in your first post to this thread?

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:4

Well most minorities believe so and that is all that counts. Until conservatives convince minorities that “voter ID” isn’t directed towards marginalizing their votes, they will always have a problem with minorities.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:51 PM

So those who vote for the guy you don’t like must have something fraudulent going on right?

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:49 PM

Well, there’s one example I can cite off the top of my head of a woman recently convicted in Illinois for voting for Obama more than once. I don’t know if she’s the one who voted twice, or another one I read about who bragged about voting for him six times.

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:51 PM

Nevermind…they don’t.

coldwarrior on August 22, 2013 at 5:47 PM

If Republicans are trying to suppress the vote, it ain’t working. In 2012, minority turnout as a percentage of the vote was the highest in history. This is a losing issue for Democrats. I think it polls about 75% in favor of voter I.D. I’ve always wondered, are Democrats trying to say that minorities are “too stupid” to obtain a picture I.D.?

TarheelBen on August 22, 2013 at 5:53 PM

Well most minorities believe so and that is all that counts. Until conservatives convince minorities that “voter ID” isn’t directed towards marginalizing their votes, they will always have a problem with minorities.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:51 PM

Really? Because 82% of Americans want voter ID, including 72% of Democrats.

sentinelrules on August 22, 2013 at 5:54 PM

Well most minorities believe so and that is all that counts. Until conservatives convince minorities that “voter ID” isn’t directed towards marginalizing their votes, they will always have a problem with minorities.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:51 PM

That’s not my problem. Their views are their own, and I’m not responsible for them. Neither is the Republican Party, the Tea Party, nor Conservatives as a whole. No one can be ‘convinced’ of anything unless they’re willing to think for themselves. We present our case — take it or leave it.

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:54 PM

loveofcountry

For future reference, this is what voter suppression really looks like, you liberal fool!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU

Deano1952 on August 22, 2013 at 5:57 PM

I’ve always wondered, are Democrats trying to say that minorities are “too stupid” to obtain a picture I.D.?

TarheelBen on August 22, 2013 at 5:53 PM

What Democrats say is that going down to the local state office to get a free ID card puts an ‘undue burden’ on minorities — as if they have to travel through waist-high snow. Uphill. Both ways! While for me, with my ‘white privilege’, it’s always sunshine and springtime.

I think it’s a view among liberals that minorities are ‘lazy’ or some other stereotype along those lines.

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:58 PM

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:51 PM

They don’t want to be convinced. Neither do their Democrat overseers. We already show ID–without whining and mewling–for so many piddling things in this country, so despite your totally disingenuous screenname, most Americans with actual love of country know in their hearts that Voter ID is no biggie, unless of course SOMEbody is a bunch of cheating douches who stand to lose political power if they can’t keep putting their thumbs on the scale.

Christien on August 22, 2013 at 5:58 PM

another one I read about who bragged about voting for him six times.

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:51 PM

That’d be the election board member down in Southwest Ohio.

Still sees nothing wrong with her voting several times under her own name and also for other family members…thought electing Obama was too important to just vote just once.

Then there is that whole fraudulent state petition thing in Indiana…to get Obama on the state ballot…local Dem party members filled out the petitions themselves, from local phone books and such.

Still cannot find any incidents of actual voter suppression through requirement of photo ID’s.

Maybe we need to go for that indelible purple ink they used in Iraq.

Dems get their pinkie purple…Conservatives go for the dark red ink on their middle finger…so they can show the Dems in public afterwards that they voted.

coldwarrior on August 22, 2013 at 5:58 PM

THE last word in law enforcement ought be in jail already.

Oh, but Obama will just pardon him…

So?

On the record. His smarmy butt in orange and shackles even for those few minutes…

There isn’t any law anymore.

mickytx on August 22, 2013 at 5:58 PM

The Donk strategery for Texas involves ginning up the minority vote. They figure going around like Texas Republicans are trying to prevent legitimate minority votes will make up for the lack of melanin on their ticket in Texas.

That, and they hope enough illegals will vote with dead peoples’ gas bills and such.

Sekhmet on August 22, 2013 at 5:58 PM

And, if you are wondering of ‘tell us what you really mean’, I just did.

mickytx on August 22, 2013 at 5:59 PM

That’s not my problem. Their views are their own, and I’m not responsible for them. Neither is the Republican Party, the Tea Party, nor Conservatives as a whole. No one can be ‘convinced’ of anything unless they’re willing to think for themselves. We present our case — take it or leave it.

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 5:54 PM

You are probably right. Republicans should simply write off the minority vote because according to you,there is absolutely no way they can win their votes.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 6:00 PM

coldwarrior on August 22, 2013 at 5:58 PM

Thanks. I knew there was more than one case other than the conviction I also read about.

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 6:01 PM

Another idiot agitating sock puppet…

Holder is a despicable piece if work. He has destroyed that department for good.

Murphy9 on August 22, 2013 at 6:02 PM

Showing ID every day for everyday stuff–THAT ALONE proves Dems’ objections to Voter ID don’t even pass the Smell Test in the first place.

Christien on August 22, 2013 at 6:04 PM

Why else would you think college ID’s with photos aren’t valid IDs but gun permits without photos are??

Democrats will do the same thing too if they felt most minorities or college students were all of a sudden voting republican.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

My gun carry permit has my photo and is acceptable as voter ID because it has a photo. TN state law is a state government issued photo ID.

I’m not sure what you are talking about.

Even without a photo on it, the bearer of a gun carry permit has already had a background check, including fingerprinting.

ladyingray on August 22, 2013 at 6:04 PM

The NAACP, Voter ID Laws, the UN, and Jimmy Carter

Who knew that Progs thought that Jimmy Carter was a racist?

The 21-member bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, co-chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker, advocated voted identification laws in 2005.

The commission called voter identification one of “five pillars” that would “build confidence” in the integrity of federal elections. Only three of the 21 commission members voted against requiring photo identification of voters.

In 2008, the Supreme Court in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181, held that an Indiana law requiring voters to provide photo IDs did not violate the Constitution of the United States by a vote of 6-3. The majority opinion was written by uber-liberal, John Paul Stevens.

He wrote:

The relevant burdens here are those imposed on eligible voters who lack photo identification cards that comply with SEA 483. Because Indiana’s cards are free, the inconvenience of going to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, gathering required documents, and posing for a photograph DOES NOT QUALIFY AS A SUBSTANTIAL BURDEN ON MOST VOTERS” RIGHT TO VOTE, OR REPRESENT A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE OVER THE USUAL BURDENS OF VOTING

The severity of the somewhat heavier burden that may be placed on a limited number of persons—e.g., elderly persons born out-of-state, who may have difficulty obtaining a birth certificate—IS MITIGATED BY THE FACT THAT ELIGIBLE VOTERS WITHOUT PHOTO IDENTIFICATION MAY CAST PROVISIONAL BALLOTS that will be counted if they execute the required affidavit at the circuit court clerk’s office.

Even assuming that the burden may not be justified as to a few voters, that conclusion is by no means sufficient to establish petitioners’ right to the relief they seek.

Resist We Much on August 22, 2013 at 6:04 PM

Why else would you think college ID’s with photos aren’t valid IDs but gun permits without photos are??

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

I’d be happy to answer this question because it’s kinda silly. Gun permits are issued by a law enforcement agency, i.e., official governmentally-issued identification. A college ID can be issued by anyone. If I start “Meric’s Online University for Underwater Basket-Weaving” I can start cranking out photo IDs tomorrow with any name I want.

Are you saying the IDs made by me should carry the same authority as the IDs issued by your State? I’ll try that next time I go through a TSA checkpoint.

Meric1837 on August 22, 2013 at 6:05 PM

You are probably right. Republicans should simply write off the minority vote because according to you,there is absolutely no way they can win their votes.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 6:00 PM

As I said — We present our case; THIS is what we stand for:_________________.

Then let the voter decide. Anything else is pandering, and that doesn’t work because Democrats have that tactic down to a science and fine art. Besides, there is little difference today between Democrats and the RNC. We Conservatives aren’t wanted in what was once our party, too.

We were discussing this on another thread but it bears repeating here: When Democrats are given a choice between their own candidate and a Dem-Lite Republican, the Dem voter will stick with his own party.

Liam on August 22, 2013 at 6:06 PM

Not true. A number of republican leaders are on record and on tape claiming the primary reason for voter ID is to prevent voters who generally vote democrat from voting. That is a fact. Why else would you think college ID’s with photos aren’t valid IDs but gun permits without photos are??

Democrats will do the same thing too if they felt most minorities or college students were all of a sudden voting republican.

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

All a college ID says is that one is enrolled in BlahBlah College, and the tuition checks continue to clear. Foreign students even get to have a student ID. It is not sufficient to identify one as a citizen and resident. A concealed-carry permit is only issued after a background check in which ones citizenship and residence is confirmed.

Sekhmet on August 22, 2013 at 6:06 PM

Speaking of Voter Suppression:
——————————-

New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case
************************************************

The New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case, sometimes known simply as the Black Panther Case, is a political controversy in the United States concerning an incident that occurred during the 2008 election. The New Black Panther Party and two of its members, Minister King Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson, were charged with voter intimidation for their conduct outside a polling station in Philadelphia. The Department of Justice later narrowed the charges against Minister King Shabazz and dismissed the charges against the New Black Panther Party and Jerry Jackson.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Black_Panther_Party_voter_intimidation_case
======================================================

Black Panther Uses Night Stick as Intimidation
Uploaded on Nov 4, 2008
*************************

BLACK PANTHER and ACORN Thug Tactics by Obama supporters with radical militant black theology seperatist mentality. Penn florida ohio nevada voter suppression pennsylvania fraud
================================================

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmuF1kjzXV8

canopfor on August 22, 2013 at 6:07 PM

So is it even possible for Washington (no disrespect to President Washington) to be guilty of preemption?

In the scuffle with Arizona, the case was made that immigration is a function of the fed–even if the fed declines to pursue enforcement along a state’s border.

By requiring photo ID when I fly, is the federal government–through the TSA–suppressing minorities’ option to fly?

Axeman on August 22, 2013 at 6:08 PM

The NAACP, Voter ID Laws, the UN, and Jimmy Carter

Who knew that Progs thought that Jimmy Carter was a racist?

Resist We Much on August 22, 2013 at 6:04 PM

Resist We Much:

Say it ain’t so RWM,……(sarc)———————–:0

canopfor on August 22, 2013 at 6:09 PM

So those who vote for the guy you don’t like must have something fraudulent going on right? Tough to believe someone else can have a different political opinion from you right?

loveofcountry on August 22, 2013 at 5:49 PM

So Republicans in favor of voter ID must be up to unscrupulous voter suppression right? Tough to believe someone else can have a different political opinion from you right?

The problem here is, that voter fraud does exist, has been documented to be occurring on YOUR side of the equation, the voter ID proponents have only ever openly said that they want voter FRAUD to cease (not the suppression of legal votes as you speciously claim), etc.

You are full of shit, champ.

Midas on August 22, 2013 at 6:09 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3