Fl voter laws tossed by judge

Poor Richard Saunders said:
Did you only read the first phrase of what you quoted? Or is your ability to understand the English language stunted?

Here. Let me help you by giving you the judge's interpretation of that section of the Constitution. I'll bold the relevant sections including the sections the judge himself highlighted.



https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21564733/ndfl-voting.pdf
Click to expand...

dude.....congress hasn't passed any laws about drop boxes....your argument is left hanging.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
feel free to document your arguments....
Click to expand...

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21564733/ndfl-voting.pdf

Not only did the court have data presented that showed that the provisions in the bill would affect black voters more than white voters, the legislature had the same data before they wrote the bill and legislators even argued that was the intent.

127
On this point, HB 1355
is most relevant. After an election in which Black voters relied heavily on early in-
person voting, then-Representative Baxley proposed HB 1355, which reduced early
voting.
But the story is more complex than that: HB 1355 targeted the specific early
voting days most used by Black voters. It also attacked—there’s just no other way
to describe it—3PVROs, on which Black voters disproportionately rely. As a result,
multiple courts acknowledged that HB 1355 would disproportionately impact Black
Case 4:21-cv-00186-MW-MAF Document 665 Filed 03/31/22 Page 127 of 288
128
voters. See Florida, 885 F. Supp. 2d at 337; Brown, 895 F. Supp. 2d at 1246. Plus,
the Legislature enacted HB 1355 “without clearly identifying why the law needed to
be changed, without creating much of a legislative record to document its reasons
for the change, and against the advice of the Florida State Association of Supervisors
of Elections.” Brown, 895 F. Supp. 2d at 1239.
In these respects, HB 1355 and SB 90 are clones.

...

the evidence before this Court shows that Black drop-box use
exceeded White drop-box use. Just as HB 1355 targeted early voting after Black
voters disproportionately relied on it, SB 90 targets drop boxes after Black voters
disproportionately relied on them. And just as HB 1355 did not eliminate all early
in-person voting, SB 90 does not eliminate all drop boxes. HB 1355 targeted the
specific early voting days most used by Black voters; SB 90 targets the specific times
and days Black voters most use drop boxes.
...
In addition, some Republican Senators
made statements on the Senate floor that could be considered evidence of racial
animus. But the views of individual senators, even lead sponsors, are of marginal
relevance to the Legislature’s motivations as a whole. Finally, SB 90’s sponsor,
Senator Baxley, acknowledged on the Senate floor that SB 90—particularly its drop-
box provisions—would have a disparate impact on Black voters.
Click to expand...

Now care to document yours?
 
https://www.democracydocket.com/news/three-trial-takeaways-floridas-voter-suppression-law/



1. Florida’s elections officials don’t want S.B. 90. The new restrictions make their jobs unnecessarily harder.



2. Don’t forget — voter suppression laws are bad because they harm voters. There is a real impact on real people.



3. The GOP’s dominant voter fraud claims don’t find the same footing in the courtroom.

Throughout the trial, the state defendants continued to make implications that the civil and voting rights organizations challenging this law were committing various crimes. In response, the plaintiffs filed a motion to preclude the defendants from making such unfounded implications: “Defendants’ repeated insinuations of illegal or criminal conduct are inappropriate, offensive, and time-wasting. Such questions, and the answers they are attempting to solicit, are irrelevant.”

In this trial, the GOP defendants (and intervenors Republican National Committee and National Republican Senatorial Committee) continued their desperate search to find voter fraud where none exists. Plaintiff expert witnesses testified to the non-existence of such fraud, citing a conservative database that only identified 15 instances of possible fraud from the millions of votes cast in Florida between 2003 and 2020.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
dude.....congress hasn't passed any laws about drop boxes....your argument is left hanging.......
Click to expand...

Actually it isn't left hanging at all. Congress passed laws about creating impediments for black voters that are not the same as white voters.

You haven't made a single argument at all. Something it seems the state of Florida also failed to do in some cases which is why the judge ruled the way he did.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21564733/ndfl-voting.pdf

Not only did the court have data presented that showed that the provisions in the bill would affect black voters more than white voters, the legislature had the same data before they wrote the bill and legislators even argued that was the intent.



Now care to document yours?
Click to expand...
here's the "factual" basis for the court's decision...
In Florida, White Floridians outpace Black
Floridians in almost every socioeconomic metric. In Florida, since the end of the
Civil War, politicians have attacked the political rights of Black citizens. In Florida,
though we have come far, “the realistic fact is that we still have a long, long way to
go.” For the past 20 years, the majority in the Florida Legislature has attacked the
voting rights of its Black constituent
Click to expand...
 
Those are the three main points in simple English for you to understand



Why would any judge side against those salient points?
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Actually it isn't left hanging at all. Congress passed laws about creating impediments for black voters that are not the same as white voters.

You haven't made a single argument at all. Something it seems the state of Florida also failed to do in some cases which is why the judge ruled the way he did.
Click to expand...

the state did what the constitution required.....they had their legislature pass statutes regulating how elections were to be held......
 
They (just like the cracken lawyers) kept making FALSE claims about the apposing side



Unfounded


Fact less



Unproven



Lies



That pisses judges off idiot
 
PostmodernProphet said:
the state did what the constitution required.....they had their legislature pass statutes regulating how elections were to be held......
Click to expand...

And they were found by the judge to be unconstitutional and backed by false claims of fraud that NEVER EXISTED


Their “facts” were found desperately lacking by the judge


Now what you pathetic lying fool
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Actually it isn't left hanging at all. Congress passed laws about creating impediments for black voters that are not the same as white voters.

You haven't made a single argument at all. Something it seems the state of Florida also failed to do in some cases which is why the judge ruled the way he did.
Click to expand...

BINGO
 
evince said:
https://www.democracydocket.com/news/three-trial-takeaways-floridas-voter-suppression-law/



1. Florida’s elections officials don’t want S.B. 90. The new restrictions make their jobs unnecessarily harder.



2. Don’t forget — voter suppression laws are bad because they harm voters. There is a real impact on real people.



3. The GOP’s dominant voter fraud claims don’t find the same footing in the courtroom.

Throughout the trial, the state defendants continued to make implications that the civil and voting rights organizations challenging this law were committing various crimes. In response, the plaintiffs filed a motion to preclude the defendants from making such unfounded implications: “Defendants’ repeated insinuations of illegal or criminal conduct are inappropriate, offensive, and time-wasting. Such questions, and the answers they are attempting to solicit, are irrelevant.”

In this trial, the GOP defendants (and intervenors Republican National Committee and National Republican Senatorial Committee) continued their desperate search to find voter fraud where none exists. Plaintiff expert witnesses testified to the non-existence of such fraud, citing a conservative database that only identified 15 instances of possible fraud from the millions of votes cast in Florida between 2003 and 2020.
Click to expand...






Here you go


Read it about a dozen times


Some may sink in
 
PostmodernProphet said:
here's the "factual" basis for the court's decision...
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO. That is what you are claiming is the factual basis? It seems you have failed to address the facts presented on any of the other 288 pages.

For instance you failed to include why the court states that the Florida legislature has attacked the voting rights of black constituents for 20 years. The court provides evidence of that some of which I have already included here.
 
AN IDIOT OBAMA-APPOINTEE SEEKING TO ASSIST THE SLEAZOCRATS IN SOME MORE CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS. AMD ILLEGAL BALLT CASTING.


HIS ASS WILL BE KICKED TO THE CURB BY THE SCOTUS, IF IT GOES THAT FAR.
 
And there it is



They hate that America elected a black president and that per the constitution he got to pick some judges


Fucking racists
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top