Judge: Law trimming early voting in Ohio is unconstitutional

ZappasGuitar said:
ROFL!

So-called "Patriot" Righties want to RESTRICT the voting rights of Americans.

Unbelievable.
Click to expand...

The claim was that it disproportionately burdened black voters.

Are black voters so lazy they have to have an extra week to vote?

Were the black voters the only concern of the Democrats allegations? Surely all those they claimed were being harmed weren't black.
 
The blacks sure are a sorry lot aren't they? Everything seems to disproportionately affect them. They can't get ID. They can't get to the polls on Election Day n
 
Seahawk said:
Judge: Law trimming early voting in Ohio is unconstitutional

A law trimming early voting in swing-state Ohio is unconstitutional and cannot be enforced, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.

The state's Democratic Party was among the plaintiffs who sued Ohio's elections chief over a series of Republican-backed voting changes.

Such policies included the elimination of a week of early voting in which Ohioans could also register to vote — a period known as golden week. Democrats alleged the change disproportionately burdened black voters. The state argued that the changes were minor and that Ohio residents had many opportunities to vote.

U.S. District Judge Michael Watson sided with Democrats on their golden-week claim, ruling that the cut violates the Voting Rights Act and voters' equal protection rights.

Watson said statistical and anecdotal evidence presented in the case reflects that black voters use same-day voter registration and early voting options at higher rates than whites. While the court can't predict how African-Americans will turn out in future elections, he said, "It is reasonable to conclude from this evidence that their right to vote will be modestly burdened" by the law.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/judge-la...constitutional-180131473--election.html?nhp=1

Silliness.
Click to expand...
Not really. First, the law restricting expanded voting hours was a solution in search of a problem. That is, the voting fraud problem the State GOP was attempting to solve did not exist. Second there was documentary evidence in the form of State Republican Party Memos that the intent of the GOP dominated legislature in restricting expanding voting hours was to limit access to early voting to predominantly urban areas in Cincinnati, Columbus and Cleveland that are traditionally both strongly Democrat with higher minority populations and the laws the GOP introduced were targeted specifically at reducing turnout of working class voters in urban areas. That's not an opinion. Documentation was presented in court in GOP party officials own words that these were their goals.

Clearly, with that being the case and with the documentary evidence demonstrating that it was so, the laws restricting expanded voting hours was a clear violation of the voting rights act of 1964 as was determined by the presiding Judge. The presiding judge, by the way, was also a Republican.

It may help to know what the facts are before you make lame and wrong opinions about this court decision.
 
CFM said:
What's wrong with voting on one set election day?
Click to expand...
Nothing. What's wrong with increasing the numbers of days to vote for an election in order to make it easier for more people to do their civic duty and increase turn out for elections? Does this not enhance Democracy?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Nothing. What's wrong with increasing the numbers of days to vote for an election in order to make it easier for more people to do their civic duty and increase turn out for elections? Does this not enhance Democracy?
Click to expand...

Since nothing is wrong with it, the rest of your answer is meaningless.

It should be noted that the argument whenever changes are made involving this issue, the argument by the left is that it disproportionately affects minority voters. Are minority voters incapable of doing things on the same level as white people? When voter ID laws were put in place, the same argument was made. Are minority voters incapable of getting an ID on the same level as white people?

Since the argument centers around how those laws affect minorities, to answer your question, it doesn't enhance democracy, it panders to certain groups that apparently are too lazy to do their civic DUTY unless the conditions under which that DUTY is done happens when they want it to happen. Because they aren't catered to and appeased doesn't mean they are being denied anything. Apparently plenty of white people can vote in a lesser range of time and get the necessary IDs. That's shown by those complaining not mentioning a damn thing about how they think those laws affect anyone but minorities. That's either because whites do it based on what the rules are or those doing the whining don't give a damn about how it supposed affects anyone but minorities.
 
CFM said:
Since nothing is wrong with it, the rest of your answer is meaningless.

It should be noted that the argument whenever changes are made involving this issue, the argument by the left is that it disproportionately affects minority voters. Are minority voters incapable of doing things on the same level as white people? When voter ID laws were put in place, the same argument was made. Are minority voters incapable of getting an ID on the same level as white people?

Since the argument centers around how those laws affect minorities, to answer your question, it doesn't enhance democracy, it panders to certain groups that apparently are too lazy to do their civic DUTY unless the conditions under which that DUTY is done happens when they want it to happen. Because they aren't catered to and appeased doesn't mean they are being denied anything. Apparently plenty of white people can vote in a lesser range of time and get the necessary IDs. That's shown by those complaining not mentioning a damn thing about how they think those laws affect anyone but minorities. That's either because whites do it based on what the rules are or those doing the whining don't give a damn about how it supposed affects anyone but minorities.
Click to expand...
Nice....go ahead...run away from the question. Grand logic there. If you don't agree, just dismiss it.

You're argument is based on a logical fallacy. The GOP's laws restricting early voting hours was over turned by the court because the documentary evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt that the Ohio GOP's intent was not to address voter fraud but to reduce voter turn out in their favor which is a violation of the law, that is, The Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The GOP's restrictions were over turned not because of something you imagined but because the evidence clearly proved that the Ohio GOP violated the law. As was adjudicated by a Republican Judge who, unlike you, respects the rule of law.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
If Ohio is so Liberal how comes both houses of the State Legislature and the Governor are Republicans?
Click to expand...

Florida, in both 2008 and 2012, voted Obama. From 1992 - 2013, the Florida Senate has a Republican majority for 19 of those 24 years and for 17 of the 24 in the Florida House. How can a state that went for Obama twice elect a 2/3 majority Republican House and Senate in subsequent years. Currently, the Senate is 26/14 R/D and the House is 81/39 R/D.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Nothing. What's wrong with increasing the numbers of days to vote for an election in order to make it easier for more people to do their civic duty and increase turn out for elections? Does this not enhance Democracy?
Click to expand...

not if you don't take steps to keep people from voting in more than one location.......why make it easier for Democrats to take busloads of homeless people all over the country voting......
 
Mott the Hoople said:
If Ohio is so Liberal how comes both houses of the State Legislature and the Governor are Republicans?
Click to expand...

lol.......when I said that about Michigan the liberal twits got great amusement from the fact that Obama got re-elected.....the simple facts are that in some precincts near Detroit and Inkster Obama got more votes than there were people registered to vote.....
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Nice....go ahead...run away from the question. Grand logic there. If you don't agree, just dismiss it.

You're argument is based on a logical fallacy. The GOP's laws restricting early voting hours was over turned by the court because the documentary evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt that the Ohio GOP's intent was not to address voter fraud but to reduce voter turn out in their favor which is a violation of the law, that is, The Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The GOP's restrictions were over turned not because of something you imagined but because the evidence clearly proved that the Ohio GOP violated the law. As was adjudicated by a Republican Judge who, unlike you, respects the rule of law.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with it but since the reason YOU say it is a good thing is so more blacks can vote, you're admitting that blacks are so lazy they have to have more days to do what white people don't need in order to do the same thing.

Thank you for admitting the truth.
 
CFM said:
Florida, in both 2008 and 2012, voted Obama. From 1992 - 2013, the Florida Senate has a Republican majority for 19 of those 24 years and for 17 of the 24 in the Florida House. How can a state that went for Obama twice elect a 2/3 majority Republican House and Senate in subsequent years. Currently, the Senate is 26/14 R/D and the House is 81/39 R/D.
Click to expand...

Florida voters won't have a Republican candidate to vote for this year, so your numbers are meaningless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top