A Republican judge in Pennsylvania just refused to grant a preliminary injunction against the state’s Voter ID black/brown disenfranchisement bill, despite the fact that the government stipulated that no fraud has occurred in the state, that they know of no fraud that has occurred in other states, and that they have no expectation that any voter fraud will occur in this November’s election. It will be appealed, of course.
“We’re not done, it’s not over,” said Witold J. Walczak, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who helped argue the case for the plaintiffs. “It’s why they make appeals courts.”
This stuff is beginning to test my faith in the basic fairness of the political system. Civil disobedience cannot be far behind.
Boo:
Any idea on why this judge, who was once a Democrat(according to the Inky story I read) later become a GOPer(which he now is)?
All I know about him is that he ran and won as a Republican and that he is too old to run again.
I didn’t read the opinion, but from reading Adam B.(over at TGOS .. who is a lawyer) it seems this judge is friends with Anthony Kennedy or something. Their reasoning wouldn’t pass an 8th grade English class.
You refuse to issue a stay, run the election under the new law, then, after the election, strike the new law down as unconstitutional , but at the same time, say ‘Hey, guess what? There aren’t any remedies.. a do-over would be expensive, and throw the national results into doubt.’
Not only are there no fingerprints on the corpse, there’s no corpse….
It’s the perfect crime.
I’m fairly aware of the system and it’s faults and the good and bad, but I’ve never had much faith in the “basic fairness of the political system”. As a young Black child growing up in the South, being raised by people who only 50 years earlier were still being called colored and still living “seperate but equal” lives, belief in the political system was slim to none. I’ve gotten better with age and knowledge, but still never improved on my faith in the system.
nothing like this surprises me.
Question now is what can be done to get people with the correct ID and everything needed to vote? More boots on the ground I suppose?
If the plan were to be implemented in the 2014 elections, it would be bad enough, but there would be 2 years to get the necessary documentation together for most.
But given 6 months? No way. If PA goes R this time, it will have been theft. Pure and simple. Changing the rules to make sure you win.
I don’t know what can be done when the rapacity of the political system is replicated in the courts.
Not to make a judgment on the merits of the case is a lazy ruling at best. But lazy will work to compromise the integrity of PA voters’ rights this year. How many extra voters do we Dems have to get in our elections, 2x, 3x before we count?
I’m no lawyer, but isn’t there some basic legal principle that laws are supposed to solve identifiable problems? I mean, you don’t make laws regulating time travel just in case somebody invents it.
In this case the state has openly admitted that there’s no problem for this law to solve. That leaves this ruling, on the face of it, as totally corrupt, with the decision baked before a word of testimony was uttered.
But then I also thought it was traditional to have to choose between being an asshole and a judge.
NO, wrong. Laws are to regulate conduct. Conduct may or may not need regulation. There is no rule or law saying that a law is necessary to solve a problem. The judge basically ruled that the legislature is acting within its powers to make this rule. And regrettably the judge is probably correct. It is not right, but it is possibly legal.
Lots of seniors in PA. Before the reveal of the Romney/Ryan ticket is wasn’t as easy to see why the GOP would want to risk disenfranchising one of their more reliable voting bases.
COurt is 3 R and 3 D. They need a 4-2 to overturn. I don’t see the road to this.
I certainly hope that the DoJ gets involved, and finds a path to stay this until next year.
If Romney wins Pennsylvania and hence the Presidency because of this law, his election will not be legitimate and we should not treat it as such.
And that would mean what? Cf. Bush 2000 and Bush 2004
How many of those policies have been rolled back because an illegitimate President put them in place? Undoing this crap is very difficult in a nation based on laws and precedents.
Best to fight like hell to make the attempt at theft futile. Also to ask a screening question in polling Pennsylvania likely voters: Do you have a valid voter ID? Do you know where to get one?
OT, but on topic of courts:
I, for one, welcome our new holy corporate overlords
Now, that is flat-out terrifying.
If these citizens are denied their right to vote, those elected cannot claim that they have the consent of the governed, they cannot claim that they represent the people.
After the Bush elections, and the subsequent catastrophic government, will the American people let this happen again?
Tree of Liberty is getting parched.
Yes. Especially if the outcome has the backing of the courts.
For half of them, it would mean their team is winning, so it wasn’t a foul. And a 50-50 country’s a tough place to get a revolution on in.
In 2000 I had Republicans tell me that the very fact that Bush stole the election was the best evidence he was the right man for the job — he wanted to win bad enough to cheat, and that’s the sort of toughness you need in a leader.
Sell your copy of The Federalist Papers to an unsuspecting AP US American History student, and buy a big foam ‘We’re #1’ finger, in red. That’s all you need to understand contemporary politics.
I fail to see how the different voter screening attempts in Pennsylvania and Ohio are not textbook violations of equal-protection. I don’t see why, other than the absolutist posturing of the republican minority, the immediate intervention of the justice department and FBI is not called for in these cases. State election officials are openly bragging of stealing the election. Their policies are nakedly discriminatory. But then we said the same thing about the financial elite, which got rich turning the economy into a casino for mega-speculation on the big bubble game.
With Mitt taking a coffee in one of Adelson’s luxo Whale suits, the circle is complete.
Okay, this really flabbergasts me. I read this about his decision earlier and almost threw my computer through a window. However, since I am at work, I thought better of it.
In his 70-page opinion, Simpson said the plaintiffs “did an excellent job of ‘putting a face’ to those burdened by the voter ID requirement,” but he said he didn’t have the luxury of deciding the case based on sympathy. Rather, he said he believed that state officials and agencies were actively resolving problems with the law and that they would carry it out in a “nonpartisan, even-handed manner.”
So basically, he is admitting that there are problems in the law but counts on the state resolving those problems. Obviously, the logical way to handle this would be to enjoin the law from taking effect until after the state has proven that the problems have been resolved. This is idiocy and this reasoning should be laughed out of any court, I don’t care what the political makeup is. This is specially tru since the state admits that a) there is no record of fraud occuring and b) they don’t see any fraud that this law would stop.
So many elections have likely been thefted w/ no paper trail what so ever.. Democrats love to pretend “it isnt happening” But there is over 12 years of extensive exhausting research regarding vote flipping. Who knows how many votes can be flipped in 2012, but I bet you that the GOP isn’t getting worse at it. Practice makes perfect. The only reason we have been having close races is because of bullshit like this.
Just count up the precincts and who runs these elections & you start to see a pattern. Help America Vote Act , ha ha ha…….
The democrats just signed up for more robbery w/ that piece of shit legislation. And boy has it ever done in it’s job.
It is funny how former senator Chuck Hagel won a MIRACLE election for his senate seat. Strange until you look at who he alligned himself w/.
Thom Hartmann is ahead of his time once again:
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0131-01.htm
“This stuff is beginning to test my faith in the basic fairness of the political system.” Beginning?? Really? Is that some kind of irony attempt?
the findings of this suffolk university-usa today poll illustrates very clearly what the rats are attempting to accomplish; and who they’re targeting:
should be a wakeup call for every democratic candidate, from president right down to dog catcher for this election, as well as future ones.
somehow, the GOTV effort, along with the campaign rhetoric, has to reach these people and get them off their asses.
Civil. Um, ok.
Whoa whoa whoa. Easy there.
The court didn’t issue a preliminary injunction before the actual trial. For a court to issue a preliminary injunction, there has to be a serious harm that will occur unless the action is enjoined right now, instead of as a result of the trial. Since election day isn’t until November, there is no immediate harm.
Looks like the trial won’t be until after the election.
Hope the appeals are lined up.
Michael Connell:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kxtm5RF_6Ow
And for everyone else, this is just the beginning of this tragic saga of thefted votes. But Michael Connell was a ridiculously important piece to the backdoor of our elections. Did our media cover it? No & they never did find his phone, funny how that works. But I guess you can write it off as crazy conspiracy theories except Mike’s history is a glaring problem w/ this whole story.
Before civil disobedience, it is time to undertake a massive campaign to get folks voter IDs. Reckon any of the candidates are doing that as a part of their GOTV campaigns? Your experience with ACORN likely tells you that church buses are a critical element of the logistics of such a campaign.