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

Skip to comments.

TOTAL BETRAYAL: Supreme Court Strikes Down Kansas Law Requiring Identification to Vote ... So much for the conservative judiciary.
https://bigleaguepolitics.com ^ | Published 13 hours ago on Dec 15, 2020 | By Shane Trejo

Posted on 12/16/2020 8:31:21 AM PST by Red Badger

The Supreme Court has stomped out an attempt by the state of Kansas to revive voter identification laws, in another move that will further disenfranchise Republican efforts to retain senators in Georgia.

The law, which had been heavily promoted by former Kansas secretary of state Kris Kobach, would have required voters to provide a birth certificate, passport, or other proof of citizenship to be able to vote. This would have prevented illegal aliens from voting in the state of Kansas and shown the blue print for other states to adopt in order to prevent fraud.

Kansas District Court Chief Judge Julie Robinson had previously struck down the law in 2018 because she claimed it “disproportionately impacted duly qualified registration applicants, while only nominally preventing non-citizen voter registration.” The new supposedly conservative Supreme Court voted to re-affirm Robinson’s decision on Monday.

Big League Politics reported on the Supreme Court’s refusal to even consider the landmark Texas fraud case as the judiciary works in lockstep to enforce the color revolution coup to overthrow the Bill of Rights and Constitution:

Texas Republican Party chairman Allen West is floating the idea of secession after the Supreme Court betrayed the people and dismissed a lawsuit against battleground states that engaged in grotesque fraud.

“The Supreme Court, in tossing the Texas lawsuit that was joined by seventeen states and 106 congressman, have decreed that a state can take unconstitutional actions and violate its own election law,” West said in a statement.

“Resulting in damaging effects on other states that abide by the law, while the guilty state suffers no consequences. This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable. This decision will have far reaching ramifications for the future of our constitutional republic,” he continued.

This is when West essentially endorsed secession as a remedy to the broken republic where the justice system has been ravaged.

“Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the Constitution,” West concluded. “The Texas GOP will always stand for the Constitution and rule of law even while others don’t.”

… The incredible disgrace that occurred during the election has mainstream conservatives wondering if secession is the solution.

With the “conservative” judiciary being such a disgrace, Republican constituents are having a hard time finding an excuse to circle the wagons around the GOP. The vote steal has shown that the swamp runs deeper than anyone could have dreamed.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Kansas
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 last
To: Red Badger
"reported on the Supreme Court’s refusal to even consider the landmark Texas fraud case as the judiciary works in lockstep to enforce the color revolution coup to overthrow the Bill of Rights and Constitution:"

SMH. We are going to have to start all over again.

Our country has been FUBAR.

81 posted on 12/16/2020 10:02:29 AM PST by Pajamajan ( PRAY FOR OUR NATION. I will never be a p£peaceful slave in a new Socialist America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #82 Removed by Moderator

To: marktwain; Southnsoul
No, the SC upheld the appeals court decision by vote.
The article then goes on to talk about the SC refusal to hear the Texas case last week.
Bottom line, the SC agreed with the appeals court and rejected the Kansas identification laws.
It's as F’dU as the headline makes it sound.
83 posted on 12/16/2020 10:11:14 AM PST by skimbell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: brownsfan
The article is misleading. It was not about supplying an ID.

The question was whether you needed to supply a birth certificate or passport to provide citizenship when you voted. A state ID or voter ID or driver's license doesn't necessarily indicate citizenship although some say they're "not for federal identification" because they're not up to Real ID standards and, as I understand it, only citizens can get a "Real ID"

The reason Kansas was going the extra mile here is illegal aliens can get driver's licenses in many states, like CA, and perhaps GA.

84 posted on 12/16/2020 10:12:28 AM PST by newzjunkey (Purdue in GA for the Senate - Vote Giant Meteor in 2020)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: malach
"Yes, but you were not the president."

Well NOW you tell me!

85 posted on 12/16/2020 10:13:32 AM PST by Enterprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

Comment #86 Removed by Moderator

To: littleharbour
There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits a State from requiring proof of identity, residence or citizenship.

Except for the 15th Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. I think the Voting Rights Act should be repealed as unneeded any more.

But under the Voting Rights Act, all sorts of restrictions have been placed on States ability to limit the franchise.

There was no reasons for SCOTUS to deny a hearing, other than it’s agreement with the result in the lower courts.

Except the little matter of time and ability.

The Supreme Court only decides to hear about 1 of 5 cases which are well presented to the Court.

87 posted on 12/16/2020 10:23:20 AM PST by marktwain (President Trump and his supporters are the Resistance. His opponents are the Reactionaries. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

Comment #88 Removed by Moderator

To: Red Badger

If this is a conservative court, I want to see the definition of conservative.


89 posted on 12/16/2020 10:30:34 AM PST by The MAGA-Deplorian (It is the Trump way! It is the only way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shadowlands1960
Non citizens have DLs... what are they required to produce?

Themselves.

90 posted on 12/16/2020 10:59:24 AM PST by itsahoot (The ability to read auto correct is necessary to read my posts understanding them is another matter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: littleharbour
With all due respect, your legal analysis is totally wrong. The refusal of SCOTUS to hear the case is its implicit concurrence in the Circuit Court decision. This case was in the Federal District Court and then the Federal Circuit Court. The law was struck down by a Federal judge ruling that it imposed undue interference with voters. There was no reasons for SCOTUS to deny a hearing, other than it’s agreement with the result in the lower courts.

Exactly. By refusing the case, the lower decision stands. That has the same effect as ratifying the lower decision without having to actually take the time to do so, or set precedent.

91 posted on 12/16/2020 11:14:56 AM PST by zeugma (Stop deluding yourself that America is still a free country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

it wasn’t when you voted. It was when you registered.


92 posted on 12/16/2020 11:35:27 AM PST by FredSchwartz (What ever happened to common knowledge and simple logic?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

sorry, not should have been NOW.

We are now the Banana Daiquiri Republic


93 posted on 12/16/2020 12:10:37 PM PST by Mouton (The enemy of the people is the media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: bigbob
The issue is distinct from state laws that call for people to produce driver licenses or other photo IDs to cast a vote in person.”

Maybe some commenters should re-read this.

The net is the same. Drivers' licenses are faked all over the place. The other docs are more expensive to fake. That's why the Left and its judges can't abide them. Kansas should ignore the ruling entirely and proceed.

94 posted on 12/16/2020 12:28:20 PM PST by SamuraiScot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: FredSchwartz

>This is one of those times where Kansas should do it anyway. What could the Supreme Court do? They have no police.

BINGO!

Just like the states that have nullified federal drug and immigration laws even though the feds do have guns.

John C. Calhoun was right (even when he was wrong.)

If states don’t have to follow legislated law, why should they follow judge-made law?


95 posted on 12/16/2020 1:35:28 PM PST by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (White Privilege does NOT begin with Being White but when you ACT "WHITE"! So, -- ACT "WHITE"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 last

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.

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