Posted on 07/23/2016 9:52:36 AM PDT by PROCON
Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe said Saturday hes already begun restoring the voting rights of convicted felons one-by-one, after the state Supreme Court rescinded his executive action granting voting rights en masse to more than 200,000 people convicted of serious crimes.
Last night I instructed my staff to comply with the courts order and individually restore the rights of the more than 13,000 Virginians who had successfully registered to vote following my April 22nd executive order, Mr. McAuliffe said in an email to supporters. Soon they will have their rights back and will be able to have a voice in their society once and for all.
Mr. McAuliffe, a Democrat and longtime ally of Hillary Clinton, said hes also ordered his staff to start working through the entire list of more than 200,000 Virginians whom we have identified as eligible to have their rights restored according to the criteria I have set.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Ah, okay. Well not okay but ya.
Virginia state law prohibits felons from voting.
The Virginia Supreme Court noted that if the governor issues an exemption for felons as a class, he has in effect abrogated a valid law.
Exempting each felon individually does not change the effect of what McAuliffe is doing, which is to nullify a valid law.
It would be like if a governor disagreed with a valid law banning heroin, and so he pardoned everyone convicted of selling heroin. That is functionally equivalent to nullifying the law, which the governor may not do.
Criminals helping criminals...
It was by only one court vote margin and the objections were that he had changed the law by promulgating a policy rather than by promulgating an action. That this margin could stand in the face of the new means of action seems dubious. Ok the law says the governor may do it for any case... he’s now doing it. If the law is to require oversight of a committee, as one possible fix, then it has to be legislated in. Texas did something similar to that for gubernatorial criminal pardons, but it had to go in by legislative process. Sauce for the goose had to be sauce for the gander too.
Yes his state police and his attorney general will have him arrested??
.......Err.....no .....the felons flourish.
The previous Governor McDonnell had enacted a plan to automatically start restoring rights without having to petition for restoration.
Restoration of rights has always been a policy in Virgnia, it just has to be done on an individual basis.
McAwful stepped over the line when he tried to do a blanket restoration.
“Individually” means he’s issuing pardons.
“Functional equivalent” as alleged here may or may not be viewed by courts as a basis of action. It may be that the political process, or an even more specific legislative process specifying what due diligence must be, is the only way to oust such a governor or prevent his actions.
Not if Cankles wins.
One of the best blessings the founders of VA gave us is that governors cannot run for two consecutive terms.
Do they get their Right to Bear Arms back too?
No fraud is too great for a Democrat when an election is at stake.
It seems like the only criteria for restoring voting rights is to register to vote - in effect, still a blanket pardon.
No review of individual circumstances of any sort seems to be involved.
In your face, judge.
the only reason mccauliffe ran is for this..to help Hillary it ain’t about Virginia..
Virginia Governors are “one and done”
Oh yes he’s using his autopen .... this is what he said prior to the Virginia Supreme Court ruling:
Lets assume hypothetically that the state Supreme Court knocks it down, said McAuliffe. The next day I will sit at my deskprobably with the assistance of my autopenand I will sign 206,000 orders.
They will have their rights back that day, he said. This is much ado about nothing.
McAuliffe: Supreme Court Cant Stop Restoration of Felons Voting Rights
http://freebeacon.com/politics/mcauliffe-supreme-court-cant-stop-restoration-of-felons-voting-rights/
Depends on how those four Supreme Court justices view what he is doing and whether they are willing to order an injunction.
McAuliffe’s public statements may be admitted as evidence of his intent in what he is trying to accomplish in individually exempting all or most of the felons. If the four justices conclude that McAuliffe is trying to do indirectly what he was prohibited from doing directly, then it is likely they will enjoin him. And his public statements sound somewhat damaging on this.
One analytical approach would be to say that in order not to be an abrogation of valid law, exemption must be not only individually-based but exceptional. Under this analysis to exempt a majority of felons, even on an individual basis, would be to nullify legislative intent and would be beyond the power of a governor.
No.
And yet do you want things read into Virginia law that are not there.
Yes, with some exceptions, although there may be convoluted processes to go through. And the feds like to ignore the legalities and stonewall ex-felons RKBA.
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.