Posted on 02/27/2013 3:59:58 PM PST by algernon_garnock
It was a historic moment at the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday as the justices heard a challenge to the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The landmark law spurred exponential growth in minority voting and is credited with getting many more minorities elected to office. But opponents say its time has passed, and the court's five conservative justices voiced strong doubts about the law's ongoing validity.
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
I'm not a fan of all the damage the Voting Rights Act has done, but is there an expiration date on it? Because if there isn't, the law's ongoing validity is not a question for the Supreme Court to decide.
Wonder which "conservative" on the court will fold? Roberts again perhaps?
The next step is to overturn the 17th Amendment as illegal in every way, shape and form. Rebellion is brewing and real Conservatism is on march as the real America, the one envisioned by the Founding Fathers, is restored.
Also, ideally, on a non-exhaustive laundry list of reducing an intrusive, meddling government:
If this falls, then affirmative action should be next.
Paging Judge Roberts . . .
O'Connor already took a stab at the expiration date for the constitutionality of that form of unconstitutional discrimination. She said it is constitutional for another 25 years or so from the Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003) decision.
It has been 25 years since Justice Powell first approved the use of race to further an interest in student body diversity in the context of public higher education. Since that time, the number of minority applicants with high grades and test scores has indeed increased. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 43. We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.
FIVE conservatives? Let’s see: You got dependable Scalia, Thomas, and Alito. They you got Roberts (wobbly at best) and finally Anthony Kennedy? So the media paints him as a partisan “conservative” when he looks to disagree with them and a principled “swing vote” when he agrees. Got it.
The truth is there are three dependable conservative votes and four dependable liberal votes right now. Roberts is no longer dependable in my mind, and you can never pin down Kennedy. The lefties only need one more vote, just one more to a leftist majority. If Scalia, Thomas, or Kennedy retire or die Obama will definitely tip the court to a long term leftist majority. Scalia and Kennedy are 76, Thomas is 64. It’s coming.
“But opponents say its time has passed”
Long passed. Neither I nor the students I teach were around when this law was passed, and neither I nor my students can remember Jim Crow. For us, it is something in the textbook....
yep...was about to expire in 2007 and congress renewed for 25 years.
If it’s unconstitutional, they can throw it out at any time.
Thanks algernon_garnock.
Its coming indeed.
But what am I saying? When has a leftist judge EVER done anything other than vote the totally predictable hard left position on every single issue, every time? So the point is moot.
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.
