Posted on 04/29/2016 9:38:12 AM PDT by kennedy
Texas' controversial voter identification law will remain in effect, possibly through November's elections, after the Supreme Court on Friday denied an emergency request from a coalition of Latino advocacy groups and Democratic lawmakers who say the measure is discriminatory.
The unsigned order from the justices did not explain their reasoning, or whether there was any opposition. While it is a temporary decision, it could affect enforcement of similar laws in other states during a hotly contested presidential election year.
A lawsuit challenging the Texas law known as SB 14 is still pending in a federal court, and the immediate issue was whether it could be enforced until the legal issues are fully resolved. A federal appeals court will hold a hearing next month on the issue, and the Supreme Court indicated it could revisit the issue later this year.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I’d be happy if a current pay stub was required.
Thank God!
The Constitution now says whatever the hell 5 out of 9 Supreme Court Justices want it to say.
One of the many problems with having the Constitution re-written by the decree of five Supreme Court Justices is that a different five Supreme Court Justices can always decide to re-write it differently.
The only thing it discriminates from is voter fraud so, GFY!
Pelosi said it herself.....when THEIR measures pass, she says The People have spoken. Yet, when they fail she says this is not over
I guess the skank doesn't like the other "people" who speak.
Which in essence means the nation of Mexico is suing Texas for having the temerity to deny their citizens the right to vote in U.S. elections.
Blind Squirrel Syndrome.
I like your ideal but I would make the only ID be your tax returns, and it has to show you paid some taxes
“Texas’ controversial voter identification law...”
No such thing. You register, show up, show ID, and get a little sticker saying you voted. Done.
The only controversy is how the leftards wish to screw with a system that seeks to avoid fraud.
Someone, anyone, please tell me how requiring the verification of the identity of a voter can be discriminating against any particular group.
I just think ANYONE on the government dole should NOT be voting!!! I am talking welfare, housing, food NOT SS Or Medicare, Medicare is forced on seniors!!!!
I’d settle for proof of being a net taxpayer.
The dead don’t resemble their picture ID any more...
You mean Dead Floks can’t Vote in Texas??? Damn unfair if you ax me....I am from Chicago....we get to vote 20 or 50 times if the money$$ is right....no matter who it’s for....$$ talks and BS walks.
Vote Rat often if you can.
They must be split 50/50 again:-) Sometimes good sometimes bad.
The states can basically discriminate on the basis on anything that they dont amend the Constitution to expressly protect. And since the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect not having to show a valid photo ID before voting, or make abortion and gay marriage protected rights for that matter, as they have with the rights expressly protected by the Bill of Rights, there is nothing stopping the states from prohibiting people who cannot present a valid photo ID from voting.
Noting that all roads of corruption in DC lead to Congress imo, pro-gay activist justices have got to be more careful about recognizing constitutionally unchecked 10th Amendment-protected state powers. Otherwise, citizens might catch on to the double-standards that the Supremes are applying to things like photo ID versus abortion and gay marriage imo.
Yea Texas!
This is why I would prefer that Scalia's seat never be filled and that the number of Justices be permanently reduced to eight. Permanently reducing the Court back to the original six Justices would be even better.
With eight Justices, it takes at least a two Justice majority (5 to 3) to make any decision. With the original six Justices, that means a 2/3 majority (4 to 2) is necessary. If the Court cannot come up with at least a two vote majority, then there is not enough consensus for them to be deciding anything.
No matter where you are on the political spectrum, I guarantee I can find you a 5 to 4 decision that you will believe to be a complete travesty.
FINALLY.
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.