Posted on 04/29/2016 9:38:12 AM PDT by kennedy
Texas' controversial voter identification law will remain in effect, possibly through November's elections, after the Supreme Court on Friday denied an emergency request from a coalition of Latino advocacy groups and Democratic lawmakers who say the measure is discriminatory.
The unsigned order from the justices did not explain their reasoning, or whether there was any opposition. While it is a temporary decision, it could affect enforcement of similar laws in other states during a hotly contested presidential election year.
A lawsuit challenging the Texas law known as SB 14 is still pending in a federal court, and the immediate issue was whether it could be enforced until the legal issues are fully resolved. A federal appeals court will hold a hearing next month on the issue, and the Supreme Court indicated it could revisit the issue later this year.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Well, that was the margin of the vote on the Boy Scouts case in 2000, where a bare majority affirmed the constitutional right of the BSA to set membership requirements. Unbelievable. Today, that decision would have been 5 to 4 against the BSA. That's how arbitrary and capricious this process is.
right - no skin in the game - no vote
Obama may as well pack it in.
Trump stoke the narrative, he stole the bully pulpit, and he is crushing his party with the truth.
When the media and courts start turning on you, they do it to save themselves in hopes of living to fight another day.
IT ISN'T CONTROVERSIAL!
F U MEDIA!
Here is something that keeps me awake at night.
Under the 20th Amendment, the new Congress takes office on January 3 but the new President does not take office until January 20. That means that if the Democrats retake the Senate (which is looking more and more likely), then regardless of who the next President is, Senate Majority Leader Chuckie Schumer will have almost three weeks to push through confirmation of all of Obamas pending nominations, from the Supreme Court to the district courts and all of the federal agencies, and there will not be a damned thing that the Republican minority can do to stop it.
When Harry Reid unilaterally eliminated all filibusters except for Supreme Court nominations, the only reason he did not eliminate Supreme Court filibusters as well is because there were no open Supreme Court seats at the time. If Obamas nomination for Scalias seat is still pending, the first thing that Chuckie Schumer will do is unilaterally eliminate the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Solve it and you vote, get it wrong and you're locked out.
Works for me.
I would settle for paying federal income taxes.
Not payroll taxes, or gas-taxes.
Otherwise we get "see, I'm a taxpayer, too!"
Someone with no skin in the game should not be allowed to decide how much in taxes *I* should pay.
Particularly as those who pay no income taxes are often the ones that we have to spend the most money on. Like welfare, police and jail.
I personally "cost" the government very little.
Even though I pay for those who DO.
The cops never have to keep rousting me out of public parks for vagrancy, nor arrest me for shoplifting.
Yup. Liberals are the kids that grew up with no rules, or disdained the rules their parents tried to get them to follow. Conservatives are the kids that were taught good rules, and followed them.
It really is just that simple.
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.