Posted on 10/17/2008 8:52:19 AM PDT by careyb
Just breaking now. Waiting on link.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
We have to make sure this Brunner chic becomes the POSTER CHILD for ACORN corruption in Ohio! She is in an elected position and she is as crooked as they get!
HEY! I AGREE WITH YOU!
HAVE ALWAYS AGREED WITH THAT PERSPECTIVE.
Now with Sarah Palin with McWhat’sHisFace . . .
all the more so.
I firmly believe God has put Palin in for HIS PURPOSES.
McSideKick will discover soon enough that Sarah has a much bigger PROTECTOR and sponsor than McSideKick.
THAT is an excellent point, she has an extension BUT SHE HAS TO DO IT.
Thanks for that positive post.
Summary:
On October 9, 2008, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio entered a temporary re-straining order (TRO) directing Jennifer Brunner, theOhio Secretary of State, to update Ohios Statewide VoterRegistration Database (SWVRD) to comply with Section303 of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), 116 Stat. 1708, 42 U. S. C. §15483(a)(5)(B)(i).* The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied the Secretarys motion to vacate the TRO. The Secretary has filed an application to stay the TRO with JUSTICE STEVENS as Circuit Justice for the Sixth Circuit, and he has referred the matter to the Court. The Secretary ar-gues both that the District Court had no jurisdiction to enter the TRO and that its ruling on the merits was erro-neous. We express no opinion on the question whether HAVA is being properly implemented. Respondents,however, are not sufficiently likely to prevail on the question whether Congress has authorized the District Courtto enforce Section 303 in an action brought by a private litigant to justify the issuance of a TRO. See Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 U. S. 273, 283 (2002); Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U. S. 275, 286 (2001). We therefore grantthe application for a stay and vacate the TRO. It is so ordered.
“I am headed out tomorrow to buy my first handgun. Finally.”
Buy two. They may not be available after a couple of weeks.
Heck, buy 10!
That sounds like the SCOTUS is saying there’s no standing to file suit. If that’s the case, that is outrageous!
There is no way anything can be done AFTER the election, because the problem will be wiped away once the absentee ballots are open in just a few days.
here’s the Per Curiam
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/ohio-order-10-17-08.pdf
“Then that’s what they need to do, and they need to keep doing it until the taxpayers get sick and tired of having to pay for cleaning up ACORN’s mess every election.”
Hmm,,, you may have hit on something there. US taxpayers apparently fund ACORN somehow (thanks to Congress)...then US taxpayers will be paying for the messes ACORN makes and all the litigation around them. Wonder if we can make it a money issue?
They are saying there is no standing by a PRIVATE litigant.
This is a federal law. If a private person cannot sue to enforce it, then responsibility rests with the U.S. Department of Justice.
Hmmm
Perhaps instead of a tea party it should be a vote party - we can dump our ballots in the tidal basin. It’s no different from what will happen on Election Day based on this SCOTUS decision.
I hope you’re right.
Let’s get them in there NOW!!!
Actually, that doesn’t appear to be what they’re saying.
I think this may be going back to the Circuit Court.
If GOP doesn’t have standing, we better find someone who does - and quick.
Actually, that doesn’t appear to be what they’re saying.
I think this may be going back to the Circuit Court.
If GOP doesn’t have standing, we better find someone who does - and quick.
Actually, that doesn’t appear to be what they’re saying.
I think this may be going back to the Circuit Court.
If GOP doesn’t have standing, we better find someone who does - and quick.
There was a small overlap from when early voting started until the 30 day registration requirement started on October 6. Some argued that you had to be registered for 30 days before you voted, but SoS Brunner (I think) ruled that the 30 days was before the election day, not before the vote was cast. I don't know the exact wording of the law so I don't know if it was valid or if she just pulled it out of her backside. Either way the law should be changed to either start early voting after the 30 day registration limit or require a 30 day limit between registering and voting.
Much as current history students learn that the Dred Scott decision was when the slide to the Civil War nearly inevitable, so too might future students learn that the Brunner was when the Republic died (or they'll learn it as the date the Glorious Obamunist Revolution started).
Thanks
Thanks
and
Thanks. :)
So one man on vote does not apply. No civil rights issue. Nothing to see here, move on.
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.