Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDISGRACED Republican-dominated USSC doing as GOP intended: DISENFRANCHISING millions...
of eligible voters due to bullshit regulations meant to "stop" NON-EXISTENT voter fraud (what they REALLY do is STOP Democratic-leaning voters from voting)
https://www.aclu.org/blog/voting-rights/supreme-court-enables-mass-disenfranchisement-north-dakotas-native-americans
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court chose to stand by and allow the war against voting to continue. Just a little less than a month before midterm elections that will determine control of Congress, the court decided not to block North Dakotas restrictive voter ID law, which will make it harder for people in that state to cast their ballots.
Republicans in the state legislature insist that the law is needed to prevent voter fraud despite there being virtually no evidence that such fraud is a problem. Instead, the real effect of their law will be to prevent voters whom they fear from going to the polls and having their say in who represents them.
The voter ID law was introduced just months after Senator Heidi Heitkamp, a Democrat, eked out a narrow upset victory in 2012, winning by less than 3,000 votes. Republican lawmakers responded by passing restrictive voter ID legislation that all but guaranteed that large numbers of Native Americans who tend to vote Democratic wouldnt be able to participate in the political process. Specifically, the law requires voters to bring to the polls an ID that displays a current residential street address or other supplemental documentation that provides proof of such an address.
This may seem like an innocuous requirement, but in practice, its likely to disenfranchise thousands of Native Americans, many of whom live on reservations in rural areas and dont have street addresses. Since the U.S. Postal Service doesnt provide residential mail delivery in remote areas, many members of North Dakotas Native American tribes list their mailing addresses, like P.O. boxes, on their IDs. And some also dont have supplemental documentation, like a utility bill or bank statement, because of homelessness or poverty. Now, because the Supreme Court refused to block the law, people who show up at their polling station with a P.O. box on their ID will be turned away.
The Native American Rights Fund sued North Dakota in early 2016, arguing that the law was unconstitutional and a violation of the Voting Rights Act. A federal district judge agreed, issuing a ruling in April that blocked the ID requirement, but the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit overturned that ruling in a 2-1 decision in September. The Supreme Courts denial of the Native American Rights Funds emergency appeal means that the law will stand, creating a huge amount of confusion for thousands of voters whose IDs were valid for the June primaries but are no longer adequate for them to vote on Nov. 6.
Republicans in the state legislature insist that the law is needed to prevent voter fraud despite there being virtually no evidence that such fraud is a problem. Instead, the real effect of their law will be to prevent voters whom they fear from going to the polls and having their say in who represents them.
The voter ID law was introduced just months after Senator Heidi Heitkamp, a Democrat, eked out a narrow upset victory in 2012, winning by less than 3,000 votes. Republican lawmakers responded by passing restrictive voter ID legislation that all but guaranteed that large numbers of Native Americans who tend to vote Democratic wouldnt be able to participate in the political process. Specifically, the law requires voters to bring to the polls an ID that displays a current residential street address or other supplemental documentation that provides proof of such an address.
This may seem like an innocuous requirement, but in practice, its likely to disenfranchise thousands of Native Americans, many of whom live on reservations in rural areas and dont have street addresses. Since the U.S. Postal Service doesnt provide residential mail delivery in remote areas, many members of North Dakotas Native American tribes list their mailing addresses, like P.O. boxes, on their IDs. And some also dont have supplemental documentation, like a utility bill or bank statement, because of homelessness or poverty. Now, because the Supreme Court refused to block the law, people who show up at their polling station with a P.O. box on their ID will be turned away.
The Native American Rights Fund sued North Dakota in early 2016, arguing that the law was unconstitutional and a violation of the Voting Rights Act. A federal district judge agreed, issuing a ruling in April that blocked the ID requirement, but the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit overturned that ruling in a 2-1 decision in September. The Supreme Courts denial of the Native American Rights Funds emergency appeal means that the law will stand, creating a huge amount of confusion for thousands of voters whose IDs were valid for the June primaries but are no longer adequate for them to vote on Nov. 6.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
8 replies, 1951 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (29)
ReplyReply to this post
8 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
DISGRACED Republican-dominated USSC doing as GOP intended: DISENFRANCHISING millions... (Original Post)
CousinIT
Oct 2018
OP
Of course the drunk rapist is going to carry out the GOP's dream of disenfranchising all PoC
workinclasszero
Oct 2018
#5
Interestingly, Justice Sotomayor and Justice Breyer both voted in favor of this.
WillowTree
Oct 2018
#8
Maraya1969
(22,489 posts)2. Was that Rapey's first vote?
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)3. It was 6 to 2, which means most of them voted for it. How is that?
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)4. Means the case it's not all about vote suppression.
The tribes are bringing address creating computers to the polls. Now we'll see if the Republicans can stop that.
Duppers
(28,125 posts)7. Good point. nt
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)5. Of course the drunk rapist is going to carry out the GOP's dream of disenfranchising all PoC
in this country.
And the pig will be doing it for 30 years or so.
FakeNoose
(32,680 posts)6. I believe all orange people should be disenfranchised
Let's start with him and see how it goes.
WillowTree
(5,325 posts)8. Interestingly, Justice Sotomayor and Justice Breyer both voted in favor of this.
And Kavanaugh did not participate in this one .