Supreme Court upholds Arizona voting laws

[DigitalDrifter]

Good to see. No ballot harvesting for Dimocrats.

Supreme Court upholds restrictive Arizona voting laws in test of Voting Rights Act​

The court said state laws forbidding anyone but voters, family members or caregivers from turning in ballots and rejecting votes cast in the wrong precincts do not violate federal law.

Supreme Court upholds restrictive Arizona voting laws in test of Voting Rights Act

"Minority groups will now have to meet a much higher standard beyond showing that a change presents a burden to voting," said Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of Califorinia, Irvine.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[MarathonMike]

It is a sad statement that we have to go all the way the Supreme Court to decide something that is basic common sense.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Supreme Court upholds restrictive Arizona voting laws in test of Voting Rights Act

"Minority groups will now have to meet a much higher standard beyond showing that a change presents a burden to voting," said Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of Califorinia, Irvine.

www.nbcnews.com

"The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld two election laws in the 2020 battleground state of Arizona that challengers said make it harder for minorities to vote. The case was an important test for what's left of one of the nation's most important civil rights laws, the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The 6-3 ruling Thursday was split between the conservative and liberal justices. In the past, the Voting Right Act required states with a history of discrimination to get permission from a court or the Justice Department before changing election procedures, the test being whether the change would leave minority voters worse off. Civil rights groups were hoping the Supreme Court would use the Arizona case to strengthen their ability to challenge the dozens of post-2020 voting restrictions imposed by Republican legislatures in the wake of Donald Trump's defeat."

This is great news because we already have a 15th amendment...so this Voting Rights Act was never necessary in the first place because due to the 15th amendment; there never was any discrimination against minority voters...especially blacks....

In fact, since the 15th amendment was passed -- there has not been a single instance of voters being denied the right to vote based on race...That is why I never understood why people patted themselves on the back for the 1965 Voting Rights Act...like come on, there was never any need for it....were these folks actually believing that states would find other sneaky ways to deny blacks their constitutional rights?? Really? No state would do that....

 

[Moonglow]

Ballot harvesting is not dead it is just narrowed...

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Supreme Court upholds restrictive Arizona voting laws in test of Voting Rights Act

"Minority groups will now have to meet a much higher standard beyond showing that a change presents a burden to voting," said Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of Califorinia, Irvine.

www.nbcnews.com

"The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld two election laws in the 2020 battleground state of Arizona that challengers said make it harder for minorities to vote. The case was an important test for what's left of one of the nation's most important civil rights laws, the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The 6-3 ruling Thursday was split between the conservative and liberal justices. In the past, the Voting Right Act required states with a history of discrimination to get permission from a court or the Justice Department before changing election procedures, the test being whether the change would leave minority voters worse off. Civil rights groups were hoping the Supreme Court would use the Arizona case to strengthen their ability to challenge the dozens of post-2020 voting restrictions imposed by Republican legislatures in the wake of Donald Trump's defeat."

This is great news because we already have a 15th amendment...so this Voting Rights Act was never necessary in the first place because due to the 15th amendment; there never was any discrimination against minority voters...especially blacks....

In fact, since the 15th amendment was passed -- there has not been a single instance of voters being denied the right to vote based on race...That is why I never understood why people patted themselves on the back for the 1965 Voting Rights Act...like come on, there was never any need for it....were these folks actually believing that states would find other sneaky ways to deny blacks their constitutional rights?? Really? No state would do that....

Poor you.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Supreme Court upholds restrictive Arizona voting laws in test of Voting Rights Act

"Minority groups will now have to meet a much higher standard beyond showing that a change presents a burden to voting," said Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of Califorinia, Irvine.

www.nbcnews.com

"The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld two election laws in the 2020 battleground state of Arizona that challengers said make it harder for minorities to vote. The case was an important test for what's left of one of the nation's most important civil rights laws, the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The 6-3 ruling Thursday was split between the conservative and liberal justices. In the past, the Voting Right Act required states with a history of discrimination to get permission from a court or the Justice Department before changing election procedures, the test being whether the change would leave minority voters worse off. Civil rights groups were hoping the Supreme Court would use the Arizona case to strengthen their ability to challenge the dozens of post-2020 voting restrictions imposed by Republican legislatures in the wake of Donald Trump's defeat."

This is great news because we already have a 15th amendment...so this Voting Rights Act was never necessary in the first place because due to the 15th amendment; there never was any discrimination against minority voters...especially blacks....

In fact, since the 15th amendment was passed -- there has not been a single instance of voters being denied the right to vote based on race...That is why I never understood why people patted themselves on the back for the 1965 Voting Rights Act...like come on, there was never any need for it....were these folks actually believing that states would find other sneaky ways to deny blacks their constitutional rights?? Really? No state would do that....

Poor you.

Why poor me??

You didn't support the Voting Rights Act??

Do tell

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

The term "restrictive" is wrong and it is left wing Yellow Journalism propaganda.
The words "voter security" should be used in its place, because they are trying to make sure no person's vote is being canceled out by some left wing asshole who is voting twice.

 

[pknopp]

Last year we had a lot of polling places get moved. I do not understand the desire to cancel out someone's vote simply because they came to the wrong polling place. Maybe they waited in line 3 hours.......

We should do all we can to protect a persons Constitutional Rights.

 

[Penelope]

You should be able to vote in every precincts of the state. I swear my state is huge. I just have to make sure I have an absentee ballot.

Oh and you republicans get an A for ballot harvesting.

 

[Darkwind]

it is no harder for minorities to vote than it is for anyone else. Unless of course your a racist and think it is.

The voting rights act was pure corruption.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Supreme Court upholds restrictive Arizona voting laws in test of Voting Rights Act

"Minority groups will now have to meet a much higher standard beyond showing that a change presents a burden to voting," said Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of Califorinia, Irvine.

www.nbcnews.com

"The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld two election laws in the 2020 battleground state of Arizona that challengers said make it harder for minorities to vote. The case was an important test for what's left of one of the nation's most important civil rights laws, the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The 6-3 ruling Thursday was split between the conservative and liberal justices. In the past, the Voting Right Act required states with a history of discrimination to get permission from a court or the Justice Department before changing election procedures, the test being whether the change would leave minority voters worse off. Civil rights groups were hoping the Supreme Court would use the Arizona case to strengthen their ability to challenge the dozens of post-2020 voting restrictions imposed by Republican legislatures in the wake of Donald Trump's defeat."

This is great news because we already have a 15th amendment...so this Voting Rights Act was never necessary in the first place because due to the 15th amendment; there never was any discrimination against minority voters...especially blacks....

In fact, since the 15th amendment was passed -- there has not been a single instance of voters being denied the right to vote based on race...That is why I never understood why people patted themselves on the back for the 1965 Voting Rights Act...like come on, there was never any need for it....were these folks actually believing that states would find other sneaky ways to deny blacks their constitutional rights?? Really? No state would do that....

Poor you.

Why poor me??

You didn't support the Voting Rights Act??

Do tell

The 1965 Voting Rights Act was passed 3 years before my mother met my father.

It's a shame that you only get to vote once now. Poor you.

 

[Rambunctious]

Didn't the voting rights act firmly place elections in the hands of the states?.....well geee....I think it did.....

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

it is no harder for minorities to vote than it is for anyone else. Unless of course your a racist and think it is.

The voting rights act was pure corruption.

It was a way for Republican-dominated states to do whatever they wanted, but Dem states had to get permission first. Then, it flipped.

 

[Rambunctious]

The voting rights act also said stay out of state elections fed.....

 

[Rambunctious]

Justice upheld.....

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

it is no harder for minorities to vote than it is for anyone else. Unless of course your a racist and think it is.

The voting rights act was pure corruption.

But are you folks the same ones who claim whole elections are rigged against you??

But you simultaneously believe that its just impossible for voting restrictions to be racially targeted against minorities??


But I am glad you have come out against the Voting Rights Act and called it corrupt....it was tiring seeing you dic suckers pretending to have supported it all this time

 

[Darkwind]

Last year we had a lot of polling places get moved. I do not understand the desire to cancel out someone's vote simply because they came to the wrong polling place. Maybe they waited in line 3 hours.......

We should do all we can to protect a persons Constitutional Rights.

We should do everything we can to protect a legal citizen's Constitutional Rights.

 

[Darkwind]

You should be able to vote in every precincts of the state. I swear my state is huge. I just have to make sure I have an absentee ballot.

Oh and you republicans get an A for ballot harvesting.

So, you want to vote more than once. That cancels out others, you do realize that right?

 

[DigitalDrifter]

It's easy to see why Dimorats have that reputation of soft bigotry of low expectations when it comes to minorities.

 

[TheGreatSatan]

Ballot harvesting is not dead it is just narrowed...

California is controlled by the ccp and their agents harvesting votes. Only ccp approved candidates win.