Posted on 10/28/2010 6:13:29 PM PDT by Kaslin
Rights: A U.S. Court of Appeals has invalidated an Arizona law requiring proof of citizenship to vote in state and federal elections. Not only our borders but our voting booths are wide open.
Many of us have witnessed the pride of new U.S. citizens raising their right hand before a judge after learning about our government and Constitution and swearing allegiance to their new country and its laws. On Tuesday, a panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decided by 2-1 to tell others who would like to earn their citizenship — don't bother.
The uber-liberal 9th Circuit decided that you don't have to be a U.S. citizen to vote in our elections, or even be required to prove you are. It struck down Proposition 200, a measure passed by Arizona voters in 2004 requiring individuals to produce proof of citizenship, such as a passport, to register to vote, and a picture ID such as a driver's license, or two pieces of nonphoto ID, in order to cast a ballot.
The law was designed to keep illegal aliens from voting in our elections, which we think they should not be entitled to do. Some 30,000 noncitizens were prevented from registering to vote in the first four years of the law. Georgia is the only other state with a citizenship mandate requirement so it too may face a court challenge.
A joint statement by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer and Secretary of State Ken Bennett, both Republicans, called the ruling "an outrage and a slap in the face to all Arizonans who care about the integrity of their elections."
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
Agree. The O’Connor panel decided proof of citizenship would constitute an undue burden on the poor. Tough. The people of AZ disagree. It is Berkeley social justice masquerading as a constitutional decision. The court clearly invaded the realm of legislative law making and as such is a violation of the separation of powers.
We can elect conservatives for the rest of the century and it will not matter a twit until we rid the judiciary of these tyrants.
But they've already pushed marriage for gays while destroying the concept of marriage. Pushed freedom for atheists while destroying the concept of religious freedom. Pushed free speech for pornographers while destroying the concept of freedom of speech. And pushed an unqualified person for high office while destroying the concept of qualified, or for that matter, of quality.
I JUST READ THE 20-PAGE DISSENT BY CHIEF JUDGE KOZINSKI, AND IT APPEARS THAT THE MAJORITY ON THIS PANEL OF 3 JUDGES (COMPRISED OF JUDGES KOZINSKI AND IKUTA, AS WELL AS RETIRED S. CT. JUSTICE O’CONNOR) IGNORED PRECEDENTS THAT ARE BINDING ON IT. IINM, THE CASE WILL BE RE-HEARD EN BANC (WITH 11 OR MORE CIRCUIT JUDGES ON IT).
YOU CAN CHECK THE STATUS OF THE CASE AT WWW.CA9.USCOURTS.GOV.
As a resident of Florida, which signed up for the new federal secure Drivers License law, act whatever it was and watching the hoops my x-DIL has had to go through to renew her DL (chain of evidence showing Birth Certificate, Married name change, divorce, new name change —and she’s been married more than once) I would recommend that women maintain their maiden name on all official documents-—this is only going to get worse for them as the government marches on. If she had to do this to vote she might be able to vote by 2016. (this doesn’t even get into the problems my other D-I-L has with being born in Italy to a military couple stationed overseas! LOL)
After all this what is there left to destroy? Liberals can’t create anything. They can only destroy.
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.