Breaking: OHIO Sec. of State Petitions the U.S. Supreme Court

[redstate_democrat]

Developing...on MSNBC

Apparently, she is making the argument that the law prevents her from purging voters 90 days before an election; that the voter list was used twice and there were no complaints regarding that; and that it is too close to the election to do as the Republicans say.

[skooooo]

1. Well we already know what SCOTUS will do...

:mad:

[redstate_democrat]

2. I know, fucking bastards

They probably won't even hear it. Assholes. But what about Gore v. Bush? Oh, that's right, that was a one time deal.

[The Stranger]

13. Sure glad the Democrats kept their powder dry rather than try to fillibuster.

[MaineDem]

3. Go Jennifer!

Who is the SCOTUS Justice for Ohio I wonder?

On edit, it's Stevens. We have a chance!

[IsItJustMe]

4. Regardless of the outcome, I think this is a wise move.

[redstate_democrat]

5. I;m interested in hearing your opinion on this.

Why is this a smart move in your opinion?

[IsItJustMe]

11. Several reasons

1) There is a law on the books that voter registration should not be screwed with 90 days before an election. That being the case, the SC may rule in her favor. That would mean a larger number of people will be able to vote, which usually helps the Democrats.

2) It brings attention to what the Republicans have been doing across this country, and that is purging voter registration roles in an effort to suppress voter turn out. This needs to be documented and reported on. This will be in the news.

3) I think politics were being played by the Ohio Supreme Court, and it is being contested. Democrats have to contest this bull shit when ever and where ever it shows up. If we don't, the Republicans will continue their voter suppression tactics and this will continue to hurt Democrats. We, as Democrats, absolutely have to take a stand against this.

[IsItJustMe]

6. K&R

We need all the honesty in this election we can get. Anytime anyone works against the Republican stratagy of purging Democrats from voting roles we should stand up and cheer. Skrew the cynics. We need to do what we can do to win this election.

[redstate_democrat]

7. What if the Supreme Court refuses to hear the case or rules against the Sec. of State?

It's always good to try, I agree. But would this create a ruling that could affect other states? I'm thinking about New Mexico, Colorado, Virginia, Missouri, etc. Would we all of a sudden get a rush of GOP suits against voter lists in these states right before the election demanding some extra verification? I think this is the slimiest POS thing the GOP has done this election. They are using the courts to disenfranchise voters.

[IsItJustMe]

12. Lot's of what if's, but you can only cross a bridge when you come to it. Not so? They have to try.

[nolabels]

15. This is good strategy if they refuse to hear, then other states would be precluded

The right wing pulls this kind of tactic all the time. Cutting them off at the pass will make for a game-breaker. Never forget the right wings claim giving claim for corporations person-hood wasn't even a real ruling but has since been used as precedent. Thank goodness keeping track of all these lying cheating bastards has been made much easier with the advent of the P.C. and the internet. The most illogical thing is how law is used logically to make illogical and unjust decisions. Be prepared, the SCOTUS is going to be the go to for republicans for a good while into the future

[realitythink]

8. It is a chance for them to salvage thier reputation

I doubt they will though. It's all up to Stevens if they take it and he may have some buyers remorse.

[redstate_democrat]

9. So Stevens would be the only judge to review the case?

Ok, if so, then that's probably good for us.

[MaineDem]

16. They aren't in session so the judge for the circuit reviews it

In this case, it's Stevens.

[realitythink]

18. No

He is the split vote, as he was last year on many critical cases.
And they are in session starting October 1 of every year.

[City Lights]

10. Well, Sammy Joe the GOP plumber's registration was recorded incorrectly, so

if she has to purge, his name should go.

[JMDEM]

14. Could this throw the entire election ?

Especially if other states pick it up?

[IsItJustMe]

17. I think it is too close to the election for the Supreme Court to negatively fuck around with the

voter registration laws of each and every state. They would be inviting an avalanche of new law suits and voting suppression charges and inviting mountains of cases and work upon themselves.

I just don't see it happening.