Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Nero Germanicus
I would argue that "proof of citizenship" is an axiomatic application of American Common law. Perhaps even more, it is a fundamental right of any state government to require citizenship to be eligible to the franchise.

Once again, the Supreme court has lost it's f***ing mind. There is nothing baffling about the case, I understand their reasoning just fine, but they are expanding the meaning of the constitutional clause beyond what is a reasonable interpretation of it.

245 posted on 06/17/2013 1:44:24 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp

It’s restraint, from where I’m sitting.

Congress can (and should) pass a law requiring proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections. States can’t, and shouldn’t, be telling the feds what they can and can’t do with federal elections.

The door isn’t closed here. Scalia’s trying not to legislate from the bench. If you asked him whether fraud is taking place, I’d like to think he’d reason that the very fact the case made it to their court is evidence enough that people no longer trust the process.

Not trusting the process of federal transfer of power is a very bad sign, since if the ballot box fails, and the soap box fails, all that remains is the ammo box.


246 posted on 06/17/2013 1:48:46 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies ]

To: DiogenesLamp

Justice Thomas agrees with you. Justice Alito came down on your side but for different reasons.


247 posted on 06/17/2013 2:12:52 PM PDT by Nero Germanicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson