Once Again, Courts Invalidate Voters Wishes

[PoliticalChic]

Court Rules Arizona Can’t Demand Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration


"The state of Arizona cannot require documents proving citizenship for new voter registration, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today. The court ruled that a 2004 law created by Proposition 200 that made voters show a birth certificate, driver’s license or passport before registering to vote violated federal law. The National Voter Registration Act allows voters to register without documentation, but designates lying about citizenship as perjury. Election experts say non-citizen voting is infrequent enough that it has no effect on election results."

Court Rules Arizona Can’t Demand Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration The Washington Independent

Once again, non-elected judges have obviated a legitimate mandate that the people voted for...



The latest variation of totalitarianism is neither religious, nor even political: it is cultural. “Totalitarian democracy” is a term made famous by J. L. Talmon to refer to a system of government in which lawfully elected representatives maintain the integrity of a nation state whose citizens, while granted the right to vote, have little or no participation in the decision-making process of the government.

 

[Father Time]

Federal law trumps state law, sorry that's just how it works. If the people vote on a law that's unconstitutional it's still unconstitutional and should be removed.

 

[ConHog]

Got no problem with this, the 10th is clear , state law can NOT counter federal law. What I DO have a problem with is the Holder Justice Dep't not going after so called sanctuary cities. These cities are in clear violation of the 10th.

 

[shintao]

Seems by the time the court gets finished with the Arizona illegal alien Act, there will be nothing left to act on. Of course, cons told us there was nothing unconstitutional about the act, and they read it themselves!! Shows how much they understand about National Health care................hehehehehee

Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
By Bob Christie, Associated Press
Phoenix (AP) - A federal appeals court has struck down a key part of Arizona's law requiring voters to prove they are citizens before registering to vote or casting ballots.

Tuesday's decision by a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the law requiring voters to prove their citizenship while registering is inconsistent with the National Voter Registration Act. That federal law allows voters to fill out a mail-in card and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but doesn't require them to show proof as Arizona's law does.

Appeals Court Judge Sandra S. Ikuta's opinion was joined by retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who heard the case as a temporary appeals court judge. The 9th Circuit's chief judge, Alex Kozinski, dissented.


Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law | CNSnews.com

 

[loosecannon]

I was just reading about this and double checked the constitution.

It seems as if this ruling would have been unquestionably unconstitutional except for one amendment (the 17th?) that overrules the state's exclusive authority over elections by inserting a provision which gives congress the ability to pass laws regulating the denial of voting rights based on race, creed, sex etc.

Obviously the court over stepped it's bounds since proof of citizenship is not a racial qualifier, or a racially targeting obstacle. It is just proof of citizenship.

The court should be ashamed.

 

[FA_Q2]

Seems by the time the court gets finished with the Arizona illegal alien Act, there will be nothing left to act on. Of course, cons told us there was nothing unconstitutional about the act, and they read it themselves!! Shows how much they understand about National Health care................hehehehehee

Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
By Bob Christie, Associated Press
Phoenix (AP) - A federal appeals court has struck down a key part of Arizona's law requiring voters to prove they are citizens before registering to vote or casting ballots.

Tuesday's decision by a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the law requiring voters to prove their citizenship while registering is inconsistent with the National Voter Registration Act. That federal law allows voters to fill out a mail-in card and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but doesn't require them to show proof as Arizona's law does.

Appeals Court Judge Sandra S. Ikuta's opinion was joined by retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who heard the case as a temporary appeals court judge. The 9th Circuit's chief judge, Alex Kozinski, dissented.


Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law | CNSnews.com

Really? You seem to be happy about this ruling so could you care to explain why it is a bad thing to require people be legal citizens to vote? The insanity is never ending!

 

[Stephanie]

what the hell does this ruling have to do with Cons?

this ruling is AGAINST ALL THE CITIZENS OF ARIZIONA and basically all US LEGAL CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES and you fxxking cheer it.

You idiot bleeding hearts in our country would rather just give it away than TAKE A DAMN STAND ON ANYTHING for once in your life.

 

[Revere]

what the hell does this ruling have to do with Cons?

this ruling is AGAINST ALL THE CITIZENS OF ARIZIONA and basically all US LEGAL CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES and you fxxking cheer it.

You idiot bleeding hearts in our country would rather just give it away than TAKE A DAMN STAND ON ANYTHING for once in your life.

I'll take a shot at that.

Conservatives don't believe in the bastardization of citizenship.

Liberals believe a Mexican who guns down 13 recovering addicts is no different from you or me.

 

[shintao]

Seems by the time the court gets finished with the Arizona illegal alien Act, there will be nothing left to act on. Of course, cons told us there was nothing unconstitutional about the act, and they read it themselves!! Shows how much they understand about National Health care................hehehehehee

Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
By Bob Christie, Associated Press
Phoenix (AP) - A federal appeals court has struck down a key part of Arizona's law requiring voters to prove they are citizens before registering to vote or casting ballots.

Tuesday's decision by a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the law requiring voters to prove their citizenship while registering is inconsistent with the National Voter Registration Act. That federal law allows voters to fill out a mail-in card and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but doesn't require them to show proof as Arizona's law does.

Appeals Court Judge Sandra S. Ikuta's opinion was joined by retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who heard the case as a temporary appeals court judge. The 9th Circuit's chief judge, Alex Kozinski, dissented.


Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law | CNSnews.com

Really? You seem to be happy about this ruling so could you care to explain why it is a bad thing to require people be legal citizens to vote? The insanity is never ending!

A bad thingy? Do I live in freedom, or do I live under fascism? Why should I be required to carry ID papers or show them in a free America? I was born here, and should be free of government. Free to drive my car without insurance, drivers license or license plates. Free to vote, or work, or marry without license or id, or background checks, etc.

So I ask you, why should Americans be punished and lose freedoms and privacy rights, when it is government that is allowing the illegals to enter America? You might ask why the Arizona governor wrote the act, a women heavily invested in private prisons to house illegals, what was her motive? What has she done to stop illegals, drug trade, gun running, abductions of American women, disease, poverty, heavy burden of schools, hospitals and other social services.

Every state has the same problem, has governors, and has a system of government to force the sealing of the US border, which is the problem. I am not the problem, I am the answer, and the answer is don't steal my freedoms, fix the problem.

 

[Stephanie]

Seems by the time the court gets finished with the Arizona illegal alien Act, there will be nothing left to act on. Of course, cons told us there was nothing unconstitutional about the act, and they read it themselves!! Shows how much they understand about National Health care................hehehehehee

Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
By Bob Christie, Associated Press
Phoenix (AP) - A federal appeals court has struck down a key part of Arizona's law requiring voters to prove they are citizens before registering to vote or casting ballots.

Tuesday's decision by a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the law requiring voters to prove their citizenship while registering is inconsistent with the National Voter Registration Act. That federal law allows voters to fill out a mail-in card and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but doesn't require them to show proof as Arizona's law does.

Appeals Court Judge Sandra S. Ikuta's opinion was joined by retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who heard the case as a temporary appeals court judge. The 9th Circuit's chief judge, Alex Kozinski, dissented.


Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law | CNSnews.com

Really? You seem to be happy about this ruling so could you care to explain why it is a bad thing to require people be legal citizens to vote? The insanity is never ending!

A bad thingy? Do I live in freedom, or do I live under fascism? Why should I be required to carry ID papers or show them in a free America? I was born here, and should be free of government. Free to drive my car without insurance, drivers license or license plates. Free to vote, or work, or marry without license or id, or background checks, etc.

So I ask you, why should Americans be punished and lose freedoms and privacy rights, when it is government that is allowing the illegals to enter America? You might ask why the Arizona governor wrote the act, a women heavily invested in private prisons to house illegals, what was her motive? What has she done to stop illegals, drug trade, gun running, abductions of American women, disease, poverty, heavy burden of schools, hospitals and other social services.

Every state has the same problem, has governors, and has a system of government to force the sealing of the US border, which is the problem. I am not the problem, I am the answer, and the answer is don't steal my freedoms, fix the problem.

okey dokey.

 

[MarcATL]

I was just reading about this and double checked the constitution.

It seems as if this ruling would have been unquestionably unconstitutional except for one amendment (the 17th?) that overrules the state's exclusive authority over elections by inserting a provision which gives congress the ability to pass laws regulating the denial of voting rights based on race, creed, sex etc.

Obviously the court over stepped it's bounds since proof of citizenship is not a racial qualifier, or a racially targeting obstacle. It is just proof of citizenship.

The court should be ashamed.

Do you share those sentiments for the Citizens United ruling as well?

 

[liebuster]

Theres a reason they call it the 9th Circus Court

 

[Cecilie1200]

Seems by the time the court gets finished with the Arizona illegal alien Act, there will be nothing left to act on. Of course, cons told us there was nothing unconstitutional about the act, and they read it themselves!! Shows how much they understand about National Health care................hehehehehee

Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
By Bob Christie, Associated Press
Phoenix (AP) - A federal appeals court has struck down a key part of Arizona's law requiring voters to prove they are citizens before registering to vote or casting ballots.

Tuesday's decision by a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the law requiring voters to prove their citizenship while registering is inconsistent with the National Voter Registration Act. That federal law allows voters to fill out a mail-in card and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but doesn't require them to show proof as Arizona's law does.

Appeals Court Judge Sandra S. Ikuta's opinion was joined by retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who heard the case as a temporary appeals court judge. The 9th Circuit's chief judge, Alex Kozinski, dissented.


Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law | CNSnews.com

So you're pleased by the fact that a handful of judges overruled the will of the people and prevented them from defending themselves against invasion? Interesting.

 

[Intense]

Seems by the time the court gets finished with the Arizona illegal alien Act, there will be nothing left to act on. Of course, cons told us there was nothing unconstitutional about the act, and they read it themselves!! Shows how much they understand about National Health care................hehehehehee

Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
By Bob Christie, Associated Press
Phoenix (AP) - A federal appeals court has struck down a key part of Arizona's law requiring voters to prove they are citizens before registering to vote or casting ballots.

Tuesday's decision by a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the law requiring voters to prove their citizenship while registering is inconsistent with the National Voter Registration Act. That federal law allows voters to fill out a mail-in card and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but doesn't require them to show proof as Arizona's law does.

Appeals Court Judge Sandra S. Ikuta's opinion was joined by retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who heard the case as a temporary appeals court judge. The 9th Circuit's chief judge, Alex Kozinski, dissented.


Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law | CNSnews.com

Pretty pathetic and self destructive ruling. So what else is new?

 

[gautama]

Seems by the time the court gets finished with the Arizona illegal alien Act, there will be nothing left to act on. Of course, cons told us there was nothing unconstitutional about the act, and they read it themselves!! Shows how much they understand about National Health care................hehehehehee

Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
By Bob Christie, Associated Press
Phoenix (AP) - A federal appeals court has struck down a key part of Arizona's law requiring voters to prove they are citizens before registering to vote or casting ballots.

Tuesday's decision by a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the law requiring voters to prove their citizenship while registering is inconsistent with the National Voter Registration Act. That federal law allows voters to fill out a mail-in card and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but doesn't require them to show proof as Arizona's law does.

Appeals Court Judge Sandra S. Ikuta's opinion was joined by retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who heard the case as a temporary appeals court judge. The 9th Circuit's chief judge, Alex Kozinski, dissented.


Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law | CNSnews.com

SHIT(ow) is the Typical Obamarrhoidal LIEbturd arsehole when he is here on display literally drooling with glee that the EXPOSED MONUMENTAL FRAUD MARXIST Obambo's Adm found a way to vote ILLEGALLY by perjuring oneself with a lie if necessary.

SHIT(ow) is the type of despicable Obamarrhoidal arsehole, and there are millions of these Obamarrhoidal Libturd arseholes who are destroying our country and are more of an ENEMY WITHIN than a stealth Al Queda agent residing amongst us.

 

[Intense]

I know I really should be used to Government so effectively guarding their right to act incompetently without consequence, but I'm not. I appeal to a higher authority, and ask both forgiveness and to save us from the work of our own hands. Save us from ourselves.

 

[loosecannon]

I was just reading about this and double checked the constitution.

It seems as if this ruling would have been unquestionably unconstitutional except for one amendment (the 17th?) that overrules the state's exclusive authority over elections by inserting a provision which gives congress the ability to pass laws regulating the denial of voting rights based on race, creed, sex etc.

Obviously the court over stepped it's bounds since proof of citizenship is not a racial qualifier, or a racially targeting obstacle. It is just proof of citizenship.

The court should be ashamed.

Do you share those sentiments for the Citizens United ruling as well?

moreso.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We need to impeach the 9th Circuit judges and disband that court

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Said it before and I'll saw it again: Baghdad has fairer and more accurate election than in any American Progressive controlled area.

This is why Progressives must be regarded to be as dangerous as small pox and treated accordingly. They must be totally and complete removed from every office they hold until they only exist is a jar in a Level IV BioContainment facility at the CDC

 

[loosecannon]

I know I really should be used to Government so effectively guarding their right to act incompetently without consequence, but I'm not. I appeal to a higher authority, and ask both forgiveness and to save us from the work of our own hands. Save us from ourselves.

The basis for this has nothing to do with the merits of the case or the merits of the AZ law struck down.

This is all about expanding federal authority over the states and over immigration and election practices.

If this ruling is upheld the feds have gained significant ground in redistributing power toward the unitary executive.