Replies

The dims have a system in place to that promises government handouts to those who vote for them.

Now that voters do not have to show proof of citizenship to vote what is to stop the dims to have the people of poor countries to show up just for a day or two to vote for dims to ensure the continuation of foreign aid?

Imagine fleets of buses from Mexico filled with democrat voters waving Mexican flags showing up to vote.

Democrats will congratulate themselves and brag of their ability to control the influx of immigrants when they show all these buses returning to Mexico at the end of the day.

Thank you for referencing that article aimhigh. Please note that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.

Patriots are reminded that a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting Supreme Court justices had clarified that, regardless of the 14th Amendment which the judge has referenced, citizenship doesn't automatically guarantee the right to vote.

“3. The right of suffrage was not necessarily one of the privileges or immunities of citizenship before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that amendment does not add to these privileges and immunities. It simply furnishes additional guaranty for the protection of such as the citizen already had [emphasis added].” —Minor v. Happersett, 1874.

Next, note that the feds are limited to protecting voting rights that the states amend the Constitution to expressly protect, evidenced by the voting rights amendments.

15th Amendment:
"Section 1: The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Section 2: The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation [emphasis added].”
19th Amendment:
"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation [emphasis added]."
24th Amendment:
"Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation [emphasis added]".
26th Amendment:
Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation [emphasis added]."

But since the states haven’t also constitutionally prohibited themselves from requiring proof of citizenship in order to register to vote, the federal judge is unconstitutionally interfering with state sovereignty on this voting issue imo, unthinkingly unconstitutionally expanding the already unconstitutionally big federal government’s powers by doing so.

In fact, this institutionally indoctrinated judge is not only legislating from the bench on this voting issue imo, thus helping career lawmakers to keep their voting records clean, but is breaching the Founding States' division of federal and state powers, stealing 10th Amendment-protected state powers to do so.

Corrections, insights welcome.