Posted on 06/23/2022 10:25:34 AM PDT by ConservativeInPA
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday ruled in favor of state Republican Party leaders in a case nominally about a voter identification law that a lower North Carolina court previously found was passed with “racial discrimination” as a “motivating factor.”
Stylized as Berger v. NC Conference of NAACP, the case was decided in favor of GOP state legislators who argued the Tarheel State’s Democratic Attorney General was not “adequately” defending North Carolina Senate Bill 824, which requires a photo ID to vote.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
No doubt an intelligent and legally profound dissent grounded in solid jurisprudence precedent.
And next year she won’t be their most extreme leftist.
And nothing but a Partisan, Affirmative Action hack..
Does this mean Beyer (or his replacement Jackson) was one of the 8?
It means Beyer was one of the eight.
Photo ID requirements deter wanted criminals from voting. All photo ID photos are entered into a database that can be searched for duplicates with fake ID's. They can be matched up to outstanding warrants. A few years ago I was an Alternate Judge on election day, and there was a guy who presented a driver's license that was so far out of date (more than 4 years old), that we couldn't allow him to vote. The reason he had an out of date driver's license was that the State of Texas had a warrant for his arrest for nonpayment of child support. The Election Judge allowed him to cast a provisional ballot, but that meant he had to go to the county courthouse with a valid photo ID within a week of election day. I doubt he did that.
Well, they were WHITE! And REPUBLICAN! By definition, that makes them racist. Not to mention, anything that reduces election fraud is racist.
Does the wise dyke of a darker hue join her fellow wise dyke when the new court session starts on October 1st?
True. You'll get called a RINO for saying it, but it is true nevertheless.
I don’t know that one they just got on the SCOTUS will give her a run for her government check money
Ketanji Brown Jackson says, "Hold my beer!"
Drat, how will Democrats vote in five counties and three
different states on the same day from now on?
This has got to be unConstitutional.
/s
Only saving grace about this activist fool is she’s a type 1 diabetic, so her time on the bench will likely be brief.
We need to pray for her health for another 2 1/2 years.
This is a bigger ruling than many realize. GOP has done well in building reasonably conservative majorities in many states and many of them have been passing laws to fight the rat election cheats. But the left, often behind Soros bucks, has done well winning AG and SoS positions responsible for enforcing those laws. Their response is to first, not bother to enforce laws they don’t like. And second not to defend them in court when some of their numerous lefty ‘public interest’ law firms conjure ridiculous suits to overturn them. The left wins by default. The people’s representatives, who’d passed the laws, and whom constitutionally are supposed to be sovereign regarding election law are denied standing and left powerless before King Soros’s delegates. This means that a legislature good enough to pass election law reforms has at least a chance to defend them in court. How they fare in advocating their position once in court probably needs additional SCOTUS help. My understanding is SCOTUS is considering taking up a case next session which could accomplish that. That they got 8 votes from this court so might get 7 from the next court should encourage judges on the right from taking that case.
Well she’s already 67... average female life expectancy for someone with type 1 diabetes is 68 years. Given she’s a supreme court justice you better believe she’s going to get the best health care available, so I wouldn’t expect her to drop dead in a year, but she almost certainly won’t be like RGB and still on the bench until she’s 87.
I am curious if there are any ramifications for states like Pennsylvania. PA has a voter-ID law on the books, but the socialist PA Supreme Court has constrained it's implementation to only first time voters. At least that is my understanding from observation when voting. I am ignorant to the specifics and any changes that could occur from the most recent SCOTUS ruling.
———-Based on what evidence, exactly?
Based on the evidence that they couldn’t prove it wasn’t silly.
Ahh, the Turtle Seal of Approval!
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.