Posted on 08/21/2013 3:00:32 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Kansas and Arizona filed a lawsuit against the U.S. federal government on Wednesday seeking court approval to require proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote.
The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Topeka, Kansas, by the two Republican-led states accuses an agency of President Barack Obama's Democratic administration of preventing them from enforcing state laws aimed at preventing illegal immigrants from voting.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
B U M P !!
WOW! Ya need a BC to vote, just not to be President.
This is the problem. You don’t sue the Feds to obtain approval, you ignore them and tell me to go pound sand. Elections are a state matter, the Constitution give the Feds no say in them other than naming the day and the voting age.
That’s how I understand it too.
Interesting. This means it is likely filed with the United States District Court for the District of Kansas.
This court has 10 judges, one each appointed by Ford and Reagan, 3 by GHW Bush, 2 by GW Bush, and 2 by Clinton, with one seat open.
Appeals from this court will go to the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, not the California 9th Circuit that Arizona normally has to go through.
Importantly, then 10th tends to vote more conservatively, and has a similar balance of judges.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Tenth_Circuit
They already tried that. AZ got sued and lost. AZ appealed all the way to the supremes who ruled against them in June.
The Feds have sued on all of these on voter discrimination grounds. This is the first time I’m aware of that the states have preemptively sued first. Should be interesting.
I had forgotten about that. It’s pretty bad when the SCOTUS can’t even remember the rules.
Ben, you do think the SCOTUS erred right?
It was somewhat complicated. AZ can require the BC on the state registration form and the motor voter form but can't require the BC on the federal form.
Well, seems to me the solution is not to have a federal form.
I may not be understanding you precisely, but it seems like the feds want to play, but recognize for the most part states are the arbiters of the rules voters play by in each state.
None the less they recognize a federal presence (can’t have the states govern those issues), and that seems problematic.
Thanks for the response.
“Elections are a state matter, the Constitution give the Feds no say in them other than naming the day and the voting age.”
That’s not entirely correct. Elections are largely a state matter, but the Constitution gives the Feds a bit more power than simply naming the date and setting the voting age. The 15th amendment also gives Congress the power to enact “appropriate legislation” to ensure that citizens are not denied the right to vote based on race.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.