Because I don’t concede your debate point I am not knowing the “answers” to any “question.” It’s a debate, not a point of fact. A black man can go to the DMV just like I did last month. No signs or winks from the clerks that the (racial slurs) can go over there and come on white boy, you get first in line. Nothing like that. Equally on all terms. To make this a racial thing is ridiculous.
Let’s take an extreme example: Alabama declares that people in a predominantly white and Republican district can vote at any one of two hundred polling places at any time between 8 am and 8 pm starting on the Saturday before Election Day, where they’re usually given only a cursory ID check. People in a predominantly black and Democratic district must vote on Election Day only, from 11 am to 2 pm, at this one polling place that’s the only one in a 200 mile radius, and you must bring three specific forms of ID issued by this one office open every third Wednesday of the month that’s also the only one within a 200 mile radius (because they closed all the others) and cost $30 each. Is this okay with you? Voting isn’t impossible for the latter district, right?
The argument being made to you is that Republican lawmakers are making policy and decisions with this situation being their ultimate, ideal goal, and that any insistence on preventing “voter fraud” is just plain lying to cover for seeking of enshrining political advantage in their favor into law.
At the risk of running into a gotcha, of course I don’t believe that such a law would be okay. At all.
And if there is reason to believe that me as a white guy can just walk into a polling place and sign my name but that (racial slur) over there has to produce DNA to vote, then I will support the prosecution of that local election official. And again, this law lets a dude vote from his fucking couch.
I sure am glad Republicans/conservatives haven’t made it abundantly clear how much they want to end mail-in and early voting!
You do remember that the Voting RIghts Act was passed by Congress, and some conservative justices decided to throw it out based on their personal opinion of the value of the law?
It was not their personal opinion of the value of the law. It was a constitutional decision about whether a legal test forever cemented in 1965 was a rational thing for the feds to do under their 15th Amendment enforcement power. Under any rational test, it was not.
So if a Justice thinks Congress has that power, it’s a “personal opinion,” but if a Justice doesn’t think Congress has that power it’s a “constitutional decision.” Got it.
Generally, I think the precedent set by this ruling, and the way that even prior to this ruling the courts were so slow to respond in the paradigm with no preclearance mechanism, are much more important that the singular case being ruled on (as it was in Shelby).
On this particular case, I’m not an expert on the details, but it appears that voting access for Native American tribes is challenged by these restrictions. And the way I viewed election law up until this ruling was that things like voter confusion could be considered as a restriction on voting rights.
It depends on how the Justice reached the decision. Personal praise for the law to me leads to a belief that it was just personal preference.
And I know you didn’t mean it this way, but it shocks and offends me to say that minorities are just so dumb that they can’t mail in a ballot or find their local voting precinct. It was what I was always taught was a bad thing to think.
Not only did I not mean it that way, that was not the meaning or implication of what I said.
Like I said, I’m am not an expert on this, but the specific restrictions on certain tribes in Arizona, as explained by the actual experts were arbitrary and confusing, based on geographic and demographic impacts that fall disproportionately on them.
Even if they don’t have internet, they have phones, right? Or neighbors? Or a registration card that has their local precinct on it?
I’m just going to again link the article I linked above and quote from it this time.
First, it’s 2021, get a fucking street address. But absent that, you read Alito’s opinion. Any voter can cast a provisional ballot and say “Yeah, I live over the hill there. I am in this precinct.” Or mail in the ballot. Or go to a “voting center.” I mean, as I said earlier, the state can’t do much more than if they sent a limo to your house to let you vote.
Well like I said, even voter confusion can be viewed as a voting restriction. At least prior to this ruling.
But that is inconsistent with what I believe is racial equality. Black people aren’t stupid, are they? They are just as smart as any white person. And if there is a requirement that you go online or call a local office to find out where to vote, then a black person can do that just the same as I can.
This “voter confusion” accusation of racism is more racist than anything my grandfather ever said.
In Arizona you can just drop the ballot in the mail?
The people that fight racism are the real racists, amirite?
The point is not that voter confusion arises directly from a quality of the demographic group. The point is that the proportions aren’t equal regarding demographics that wind up in the scenario where laws like the AZ one can cause confusion.
So if x% of all demographics (x can even be really low, say 3%) will not cast a vote and have it get counted when they’re in the circumstance where there is a restriction on where they cast their vote, and one group is more likely to be in that circumstance in the first place, then mandating them to cast a vote in a certain place can have a disproportionate impact.
Well, but not against Italians. He said a lot of WAY racist things against Italians.