http://truth-out.org/news/item/17204-ku-...arris-acts

Without further comment.

It is scary about the right's mad rush to put the cat back in the bag now that they are being exposed as the nuts they are, they have to cheat and lie to win. But believe me, just like blacks were underestimated back then, and just like progressives of all colors put Obama in the White House TWICE, I think they are making the same stupid mistake they always make, instead of progressing forward, these morons cling to an outdated and bigoted past.

The right has had a successful push for the past 50 years, but now they know it isn't fooling anyone anymore and this decision will not hold progress back for long. 5-4 really is not a slam dunk in any case and makes it easier for future courts to reverse.

This is merely a hiccup and one that will keep the fire of progress on the move.

The melodramatic style with which this decision is being reported is hysterical. One would think, based on the headlines, that the they struck down the entire Act.

Part of Chief Justice Roberts' opinion:

Quote: At the same time, voting discrimination still exists; noone doubts that. The question is whether the Act’s extraordinary measures, including its disparate treatment ofthe States, continue to satisfy constitutional requirements. As we put it a short time ago, “the Act imposes currentburdens and must be justified by current needs.” Northwest Austin, 557 U. S., at 203.

Here is what I think is missing from most of the commentary:
1. The court upheld the constitutionality of the preclearance provision, much to the chagrin of Justice Thomas.
2. The opinion emphatically states that 'a' formulaic method for determining preclearance, in and of itself, is not unconstitutional.
3. What leads to 'disparate treatment of the States' is the fact that not only is the prescribed formula, in place since 1965, inept at revealing modern discrimanatory mechanisms, but uses 1972 for its latest baseline.
4. The opinion is essentially telling Congress to create a new formula that addresses modern discriminatory concerns and apply the new criteria across the board.
5. The court warned Congress of this in the opinion of a 2009 Voters Right Act case that was statutorily resolved (The case Roberts quotes above).

Court opinion:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12p...6_6k47.pdf

Quote:The court upheld the constitutionality of the preclearance provision

Um, what they did is tell you that you can fuck a supermodel and then cut your balls off.

Do you really think such legislation will get through this particular bunch of nazi fucknuts in the House?

"In theory" you can buy a car but it does you no good not to have gas in it. While it does not gut the "oversight" part of the law, it does deem the oversight location institutions unconstitutional. So basically you are removing the gas from the car, which makes it literally open season on voting rights.

Or like Minimalist said "fuck a super model and then cut your balls off".

5-4 has been a relatively constant split over the past couple of decades especially on social issues. But to claim that the majority was "fair" about it is bullshit, the truth of this reversal on 40 years of law is told by minority judge in Ruth Ginsburg who called the decision "demolition".

So claiming it was split and fair would be like saying "Yea we left the building mostly in tact, but we weakened the main pillars"

(June 25, 2013 at 9:23 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Um, what they did is tell you that you can fuck a supermodel and then cut your balls off.

I think a better analogy would be that they told Congress to no longer shit on the lawn because we now have indoor plumbing.

Quote:Do you really think such legislation will get through this particular bunch of nazi fucknuts in the House?

Yes, without much difficulty if handled properly. The relative silence of Republican lawmakers after the decision is almost deafening, and telling. Nobody wants to be on the wrong side of this. In addition, it's a perfect opportunity for party leadership to provide an example that the entire lot can actually do something productive.

Reid, McConnell, Durbin, Cornyn, Boehner, Pelosi, Cantor, McCarthy and Hoyer should clear their schedules and lock themselves in a room tomorrow with the goal of having a joint press conference in the afternoon to address the ruling and communicate a plan of action.

The action should be limited to providing an updated formula, that's it. No amendments that attempt to address some other provision of the VRA should be allowed. No extraneous non-VRA bullshit either.

I do not intend to hold my breath waiting.

They republicunts have spent the last 3 years trying to disenfranchise minority voters. The court just handed them a great big present. Don't expect them to take it to the "returns" counter.

Quote:I think a better analogy would be that they told Congress to no longer shit on the lawn because we now have indoor plumbing.

Shitting on the lawn? So that is what the original voting rights act was? Shitting on the lawn? Wow.

(June 25, 2013 at 10:41 pm)Brian37 Wrote: "In theory" you can buy a car but it does you no good not to have gas in it.

To further expand on you car analogy, yes they took the gas out. But if anything it's because the gas in the car is not good enough for the engine. We can put better gas in the car.

The data that was being used for the formulas was outdated. They need to update the law.

(June 25, 2013 at 10:52 pm)plaincents822 Wrote:

(June 25, 2013 at 10:41 pm)Brian37 Wrote: "In theory" you can buy a car but it does you no good not to have gas in it.

To further expand on you car analogy, yes they took the gas out. But if anything it's because the gas in the car is not good enough for the engine. We can put better gas in the car.

The data that was being used for the formulas was outdated. They need to update the law.

Bullshit, you'd have me believe a republican party which has favored corporate America, has fucked workers rights over, has bowed to global corporatism, has attacked female control over reproductive rights and be trusted with voting rights considering they constantly over the past few years have mass produced voter ID laws and attempts to ban early voting and gerrymandered on a mafia scale, whose mantra since Obama's first election made their goal to prevent him from getting a second term, and announced so even before his first Inauguration.

You'd have me believe they have voters rights in our interest? No this is not Teddy Roosevelt's republican party, it isn't even Reagan's republican party, this current bunch is a throwback to pre civil war era where only white rich guys had any rights. They are the bat shit crazy party.

Do you think Judge Ginsburg who has spent her life studying case law and precedence called the majority's decision "demolition" for nothing?