Posted on 04/27/2015 3:46:07 PM PDT by yuffy
A challenge to Texas voter identification law will be heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on Tuesday. A three judge panel that includes two Democratic appointees will hear the case. One of the judges is a federal district court judge from the Eastern District of Texas who is sitting by designation.
The case is Marc Veasey, et al., Texas Association of Hispanic County Judges and County Commissioners v. Greg Abbott et al. (cause no. 14-41127). Breitbart Texas reported that on October 11, 2014, U. S. District Court Judge Nelva Gonzalez Ramos, a President Obama appointee, issued a permanent injunction requiring Texas to return to enforcing the in-person voter identification requirements that existed before Senate Bill 14 became law. The timing of the Order created uncertainty for election officials in Texas. Early voting started on October 20th.
Judge Ramos, who serves in the Corpus Christi Division of the U.S. District Courts for the Southern Division of Texas, issued a 147 page opinion and held that the law “constituted an unconstitutional poll tax.” She also opined that “SB 14 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.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
If the court rules against the state, how about the governor just saying he refuses to accept the authority of the court or the judges based on Amendment 10.
We need her to take a look at California’s gun laws. They also are an unconscionable burden on an enumerated civil right; and have a particularly discriminatory effect on African Americans and Hispanics; and were imposed with the specific intent to burden ethnic minorities, thereby increasing the likelihood of creating criminals out of what is otherwise and ordinarily a lawful act, thereby permanently stripping them of their rights to keep and bear arms and to vote among others.
Somehow I doubt she feels as I do on this issue, though.
The Governor will issue an executive order and the Demorats can go to hell.
I thought the U.S. Supreme Court ruled voter ID laws were constitutional.
They only ruled specific ones were. They did not rule that all, or even most, were. It only applies to specific circumstances.
Because of the gazillion problems with that you get a Nationalize National Guard. There is ZERO upside to that not the least of which is the state going bankrupt from just the atty fees.
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.