Posted on 06/29/2015 1:44:06 PM PDT by Zakeet
States not permitted to alter federal voter registration form to require proof of citizenship.
The Supreme Court today refused to accept a case which sought to allow states to supplement a federal voter registration form so as to require proof of citizenship to vote.
Such proof is particularly important given how freely many states are handing out drivers licenses to illegal immigrants, and the Obama administration’s unilateral implementation of quasi-amnesty deferrals (some of which were stopped in court). It’s just not enough anymore that someone is here legally (or at least, is not being deported)
[Snip]
This is not just a battle of forms. It’s a battle for preventing theft of elections.
(Excerpt) Read more at legalinsurrection.com ...
I wonder what Obama’s gestapo (NSA) has on Roberts, Kennedy, and the others so as to have them make complete and utter fools out of themselves. Scalia hinted at this. Wait until the useful idiots are no longer useful. Thankfully they’’ll come for me and other well armed patriots first, but have no fear as most of us will be watching from above when they come for the brownshirts(progressives) and we will see their looks on their faces However, the best And most surprised looks on their faces will come when they meet their creator and have to explain how their political persuasions had no effect on the murders of millions of innocent children, their hand in the murders of millions of conservatives and so on.
The people appealing to the supremes need to just stop. This government is illegitimate. Why are they wasting there’s and everyone’s time? We need a mass movement to encourage our state pols to nullify. If that doesn’t work, secede.
You mean like Obummer care? Funny how some laws can be re-written by the nine.
States should have total control
No federal official is elected by the people.
I would hope Texas will declare the decision null
This SCOTUS session is way, way, way worse than 9/11.
9/11 didn’t have a snowball’s chance of killing the country.
This does, a very real one.
But remember - the day before Roberts said that, he remedied the badly written ObamaCare law in order to keep it in place and intact.
Roberts is many things, but “right” is not one of them.
Obama promised to not allow subsequent presidents to reverse his legacy.
He has sealed his fundamental transformation.
Viva La Reconquista.... uhhh.. Viva La Caliphate!!!
WE been had.. and then some.
The states are going to have to step up and retake their powers not enumerated in the US constitution.
Kris Kobach is my sec of state. He’s been fighting the Regime and RINOs in Kansas for several years. Call him and encourage him to uphold Kansas law.
(785) 296-4564
The law is slightly vague as written. “states” could mean state of Alabama or United States. If the law explicitly had said “None of the 50 states will get federal subsidies if they do not set up an exchange in their respective state”, then Roberts or anyone can only interpret one way.
It’s dangerous for conservatives to think we can just keep doing what we’ve been doing.
There will be NO requirements at all with regard to voting.
Ballots will be freely available to ALL members of our society.
They'll be printed on the back of your 1040 form. Just send in your taxes and vote.
You don't pay taxes? Well since you don't have any skin in the game I don't guess you need to vote either.
Don’t give me that stupid, “waaaaaa, we can’t tell if “states” means each of the 50 states, or if it means the one and only singular United States of America” whine (hint, the United States of America is referred to as the Union, the Federal Government, the United States, and rarely, if ever, in this country is it referred to as the State - but if it were, it would be the singular form - bang your forehead and say “DOH!”).
What you say is as foolish as Robert’s twisting and turning. Remember, he not only did it last week, he did it when the ObamaCare mandate came before the court, allowing the penalty to be called a tax, and not a tax, all in the same ruling.
There is ZERO ambiguity in the law for honest, thinking people. If a state does not set up an exchange, that state will not get the federal subsidies (see the clear distinction there?). Think for one short moment - why would the fed set a requirement for it to subsidize itself? Why would the fed set a mandate that it do something in order to be subsidized? - simply write in the law that the fed will set up the exchange and be done with it.
It is VERY clear that the meaning was for the individual states - which is always the meaning in the law when the plural is used. States CANNOT mean the Union, in can only mean the states of the Union. If referring to the Union, the term would be “STATE” singular.
Excellent point. This rogue court adheres to every word of our Constitution ONLY WHEN IT’S CONVENIENT TO THEM.
I thought the SCOTUS ruled Voter ID VALID in the States in 2009?
Well, the majority of SCOTUS disagreed with your interpretation. So what can you do now?
The way I see it, any congress in future in conjunction with the president can overturn the entire Obamacare law without any need for SCOTUS to interpret nuances within it.
I’ll wager that Texas is first to secede, followed by Arizona. Gee, that’s odd.. These are two of the states deemed ‘hostile’ by the Jade Helmers.
I’d like to decorate that photo with appropriate clown makeup and gay costumes for the “Fabulous Gang of Jokers.”
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.