evince
Truthmatters
Dear fucking scum bait cheating lying asshole
NO SHIT IT APPLIED TO ALL PARTIES IN THE USA
laws are for everyone
You shits keep cheating and the laws have to be informed to stop you
Fuck you very much
SCOTUS says no to some R election cheating
- Thread starter evince
- Start date
Dear fucking scum bait cheating lying asshole
NO SHIT IT APPLIED TO ALL PARTIES IN THE USA
laws are for everyone
You shits keep cheating and the laws have to be informed to stop you
Fuck you very much
evince
Truthmatters
evince
Truthmatters
How perfect
Most election laws are state laws--voting hours and days for early voting, election locations, etc. These can still be limited or manipulated by states. Most of these are not federal issues. It only stops the states from passing these laws IF they violate state regulations or constitution.
It only ruled that the state legislatures do not have supreme authority in this area.
ExpressLane
Verified User
YOUR party whined about the NY courts redrawing the New York maps because the Democrats had gerrymandered so badly the court had to fix it..
evince
Truthmatters
evince
Truthmatters
I’ll go get the record for you to read
evince
Truthmatters
https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legal-work/11-05-2016_Order.pdf
Here is the beginning of the court records
It began after Nixon did his famous election cheating
Here is the beginning of the court records
It began after Nixon did his famous election cheating
evince
Truthmatters
Ooops that is not the first incident
This is after the USA courts determined Republican election cheating needs to have a leash on the cheating party because they were acting with evil intent
That leash lasted DECADES because the republicans kept getting caught cheating in elections
Once republicans got Roberts in the top seat he rewarded them by removing the decades long leash
Roberts himself is responsible for all the Republican Party cheating since he freed them up to cheat more
This is after the USA courts determined Republican election cheating needs to have a leash on the cheating party because they were acting with evil intent
That leash lasted DECADES because the republicans kept getting caught cheating in elections
Once republicans got Roberts in the top seat he rewarded them by removing the decades long leash
Roberts himself is responsible for all the Republican Party cheating since he freed them up to cheat more
evince
Truthmatters
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/court-cases/dnc-v-rnc-consent-decree
DNC v. RNC Consent Decree
Facebook
Twitter
Share
In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree with their Democratic party counterparts.
PUBLISHED: November 5, 2016
Gerrymandering & Fair Representation icon
Gerrymandering & Fair Representation
Redistricting
In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree with their Democratic party counterparts. Under that decree and its 1987 successor, the Republican party organizations agreed to allow a federal court to review proposed “ballot security” programs, including any proposed voter caging.
The consent decree has been invoked several times, by the parties to the decree and by others. In late 2008, the Democratic National Committee and Obama for America sought to enforce the consent decree, claiming that the RNC had not submitted alleged ballot security operations for review. After the election, the RNC asked the federal court to vacate or substantially modify the decree. The court denied the RNC’s motion to vacate the consent decree and ordered the decree remain in effect until December 2017. The RNC then appealed to the Third Circuit, which unanimously rejected the appeal and affirmed the District Court’s decision. A subsequent petition for rehearing en banc by the full Third Circuit, and a certiorari petition to U.S. Supreme Court, were denied.
On October 26, 2016, the DNC filed a motion asking that the court find the RNC had violated the decree. On November 5, after abbreviated discovery, the district court denied the DNC’s request, ruling that the DNC had not provided sufficient evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the RNC on ballot-security operations, but will allow the DNC to offer further evidence after the election.
DNC v. RNC Consent Decree
Share
In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree with their Democratic party counterparts.
PUBLISHED: November 5, 2016
Gerrymandering & Fair Representation icon
Gerrymandering & Fair Representation
Redistricting
In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree with their Democratic party counterparts. Under that decree and its 1987 successor, the Republican party organizations agreed to allow a federal court to review proposed “ballot security” programs, including any proposed voter caging.
The consent decree has been invoked several times, by the parties to the decree and by others. In late 2008, the Democratic National Committee and Obama for America sought to enforce the consent decree, claiming that the RNC had not submitted alleged ballot security operations for review. After the election, the RNC asked the federal court to vacate or substantially modify the decree. The court denied the RNC’s motion to vacate the consent decree and ordered the decree remain in effect until December 2017. The RNC then appealed to the Third Circuit, which unanimously rejected the appeal and affirmed the District Court’s decision. A subsequent petition for rehearing en banc by the full Third Circuit, and a certiorari petition to U.S. Supreme Court, were denied.
On October 26, 2016, the DNC filed a motion asking that the court find the RNC had violated the decree. On November 5, after abbreviated discovery, the district court denied the DNC’s request, ruling that the DNC had not provided sufficient evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the RNC on ballot-security operations, but will allow the DNC to offer further evidence after the election.
Callinectes
Proud MAGA Semi-Facist
Ah! Leading off with a classic! Fingers crossed for a strong closing!!
Then why did you title your thread "SCOTUS says no to some R election cheating"? Are you suggesting that only republicans gerrymander?
Tell that to hunter and his dad, president flat liner.
That's hilarious. From MY POV, YOU shits keep cheating!
How mediocre and pedestrian! You are losing your touch.
QP!
Verified User
Yup.
This was one of the most important cases to the Federalist society and the right.
They can no longer win most elections via the vote count and increasingly if they are going to hold on to power, things like more aggressive gerrymandering and the INdependent State legislature were needed. Those being shut down are going to see a bunch of seat shift to fairness and Dems very fast.
I am speculating but i see both Roberts and Kavanaugh kind of teaming up and drawing a line now against some of the most aggressive right lines. And i think that is because both of them know that Alito leaked the Roe V Wade decision to his Federalist handlers, to force the hand of Kavanaugh to stay with his initial position when it was rumoured Roberts was close to getting him to move to a more compromise middle position.
I think the resent Alito and the Federalist society strong arming them like that.
This was one of the most important cases to the Federalist society and the right.
They can no longer win most elections via the vote count and increasingly if they are going to hold on to power, things like more aggressive gerrymandering and the INdependent State legislature were needed. Those being shut down are going to see a bunch of seat shift to fairness and Dems very fast.
I am speculating but i see both Roberts and Kavanaugh kind of teaming up and drawing a line now against some of the most aggressive right lines. And i think that is because both of them know that Alito leaked the Roe V Wade decision to his Federalist handlers, to force the hand of Kavanaugh to stay with his initial position when it was rumoured Roberts was close to getting him to move to a more compromise middle position.
I think the resent Alito and the Federalist society strong arming them like that.
It is called an arrogant elitist Democrat makes guesses