Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
SpiceGIrl

Supreme Court, in 5–4 Decision, Allows States to Purge Voters for Their Failure to Vote

151 posts in this topic

11 minutes ago, TheBaldGuy said:

I do think Maryland will purge voters who have not voted in a number of elections..

 

 

Someone already said it happened to a family member.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, zenwalk said:

. This is just more republican cheating at the vote. 

How is it cheating?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, can you hear me now! said:

if voting is so easy, why are so many states trying to make it harder to vote?

How hard is it to go to a school and cast a vote? I've been doing it for almost 40 years including when I was stationed in Germany and Japan. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, bmore_ken said:

How is it cheating?

Its cheating because the Republicans are attempting to purge mostly Democratic registered voters under the guise of purging voters who may have moved. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bmore_ken said:

How hard is it to go to a school and cast a vote? I've been doing it for almost 40 years including when I was stationed in Germany and Japan. 

How did you get to the school from Germany and Japan?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, TheBaldGuy said:

I do think Maryland will purge voters who have not voted in a number of elections..

 

 

That is illegal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hst2 said:

Its cheating because the Republicans are attempting to purge mostly Democratic registered voters under the guise of purging voters who may have moved. 

I don't see parties mentioned in the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, hst2 said:

That is illegal.

Are you sure it is illegal?   Here is a link to the Maryland law.   Do you have a source that supports your position?

 

https://elections.maryland.gov/voter_registration/documents/Voter Registration List Maintenance.pdf

 

What happens if a voter moves to another state? If the voter tells us by signature that he or she has moved, we remove the voter’s name. Most of time, we learn from other sources that a voter has moved. For example, the United States Postal Service returns a voter’s sample ballot and provides the voter’s new address. When we receive this information, we send a letter asking the voter to confirm where he or she lives. The letter is sent by forwardable mail and includes a return card for the voter to use to tell us his or her new address. This is the called “confirmation mail” process and is required by federal law. If the voter returns the card and confirms that he or she has moved to another state, we cancel the voter’s registration. If the voter doesn’t respond to the mailing within 2 weeks, the voter becomes an “inactive voter.” If the “inactive voter” doesn’t vote or try to vote in the next two election cycles (four years), the voter’s registration will be cancelled. Again, this process is required by federal law. If I’m designated as an “inactive voter” may I still vote? Yes, as an “inactive voter” your name will appear in the electronic pollbook. The checkin judge will ask you to confirm your residential address and the voter registration record will be returned to an “active” status.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SpiceGIrl said:

Not wrong,  Back to school for you, sweetie!

Try again, this time try to (key word here.....) comprehend what you read!

Yo get an F, it stands for "Fail! lol! :P

I'll take my chances that the *American Constitutional Society for Law and Politics is correct and that "can you hear me now", "msmaggie", and "bmore_ken" from The Baltimore Sun Talk Forum are not.

Pay close attention this time and remember that key word.....comprehend.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/does-the-us-constitution-guarantee-americans-an-affirmative-individual-right-to-vote

*The American Constitution Society brings together many of the country’s best legal minds to articulate a progressive vision of our Constitution and laws.

You originally stated:

"Just to clarify the final sentence's error - there is no constitutional right to vote."

As you've been corrected, not true.

Now you're saying that there is no AFFIRMATIVE right to vote (in the Constitution). That's true (I love seeing people learn!)

I think the problem here is you don't understand what "affirmative right" means; nor, I suspect, the role of the Bill of Rights.

Here's an assignment for you: look up "affirmative right" and role of the Bill of Rights. Then report back what you learned.

Not links. In your own words.

Good luck!

Edited by ms maggie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

You originally stated:

"Just to clarify the final sentence's error - there is no constitutional right to vote."

As you've been corrected, not true.

Now you're saying that there is no AFFIRMATIVE right to vote (in the Constitution). That's true (I love seeing people learn!)

I think the problem here is you don't understand what "affirmative right" means; nor, I suspect, the role of the Bill of Rights.

Here's an assignment for you: look up "affirmative right" and role of the Bill of Rights. Then report back what you learned.

Not links. In your own words.

Good luck!

I am inclined to swing with Spice Girl on this one, although I don't mind having doubt about. One reason why is because she produced an article from Vox supporting her point, and they are a reliable source..

One of the things that that article points out is that if there is a constitutional right to vote, any state with a voter ID law would be forced to assure that everyone has that ID, and certainly, they do not.

However, I gather that the Supreme Court could determine that there is a constitutional right to vote, just as they recently ruled that everyone has an individual right to own a gun. But that certainly isn't going to happen with this Supreme Court.

To make sure the Constitution is clear, I would like to see an amendment to the Constitution. that specifically addresses this 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hst2 said:

I reiterate the point that voting through mail would be an effective way to hold a vote.

Sadly, effective isn't the goal of many.

Funny if you think about it. Mail (electronic and snail) is fine for filing taxes but somehow not voting? Though there are some more enlightened places where mail is utilized. In time common sense will prevail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, hst2 said:

I am inclined to swing with Spice Girl on this one, although I don't mind having doubt about. One reason why is because she produced an article from Vox supporting her point, and they are a reliable source..

One of the things that that article points out is that if there is a constitutional right to vote, any state with a voter ID law would be forced to assure that everyone has that ID, and certainly, they do not.

However, I gather that the Supreme Court could determine that there is a constitutional right to vote, just as they recently ruled that everyone has an individual right to own a gun. But that certainly isn't going to happen with this Supreme Court.

To make sure the Constitution is clear, I would like to see an amendment to the Constitution. that specifically addresses this 

There is no AFFIRMATIVE right to own a gun, nor is there an affirmative right to vote, in the Constitution. 

In some states you need ID to vote.

In some states you need ID to buy/own a gun.

I don't get your voter ID point. The ID confirms residency. You have a Constitutional right to vote in the country, you don't have a Constitutional right to vote outside of your state, city, township etc.

Edited by ms maggie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, TheBaldGuy said:

Are you sure it is illegal?   Here is a link to the Maryland law.   Do you have a source that supports your position?

 

https://elections.maryland.gov/voter_registration/documents/Voter Registration List Maintenance.pdf

 

What happens if a voter moves to another state? If the voter tells us by signature that he or she has moved, we remove the voter’s name. Most of time, we learn from other sources that a voter has moved. For example, the United States Postal Service returns a voter’s sample ballot and provides the voter’s new address. When we receive this information, we send a letter asking the voter to confirm where he or she lives. The letter is sent by forwardable mail and includes a return card for the voter to use to tell us his or her new address. This is the called “confirmation mail” process and is required by federal law. If the voter returns the card and confirms that he or she has moved to another state, we cancel the voter’s registration. If the voter doesn’t respond to the mailing within 2 weeks, the voter becomes an “inactive voter.” If the “inactive voter” doesn’t vote or try to vote in the next two election cycles (four years), the voter’s registration will be cancelled. Again, this process is required by federal law. If I’m designated as an “inactive voter” may I still vote? Yes, as an “inactive voter” your name will appear in the electronic pollbook. The checkin judge will ask you to confirm your residential address and the voter registration record will be returned to an “active” status.

Interesting. That appears to violate federal law. 

"The removal of voters for non-voting or for having moved can only be done after meeting certain requirements provided in the Act. The Act allows for removal of voters from registration lists when they have been convicted of a disqualifying crime or adjudged mentally incapacitated, where such removals are allowed by state law."

The National Voter Registration Act

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

There is no AFFIRMATIVE right to own a gun, nor is there an affirmative right to vote, in the Constitution.

In some states you need ID to vote.

In some states you need ID to buy/own a gun.

I don't get your voter ID point. The ID confirms residency. You have a Constitutional right to vote in the country, you don't have a Constitutional right to vote outside of your state, city, township etc.

States that have voter ID laws are not required to assure that every voter has an ID. They merely make them available to voters who take the time to go get them. One thinks of Alabama's shutting down of DMVs in areas where Democrats are more likely to vote.

In other words, without an affirmative right to vote, the right to vote doesn't seem to mean very much. States are free to target certain kinds of voters and set up all sorts of obstacles to voting for them, and this Supreme Court seems more than willing support them.

Based on the Supreme Court's gutting of the enforcement provision of the Voting Rights Act, it doesn't seem like they care much for 15th amendment either.

Edited by hst2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hst2 said:

States that have voter ID laws are not required to assure that every voter has an ID. They merely make them available to voters who take the time to go get them. One thinks of Alabama's shutting down of DMVs in areas where Democrats are more likely to vote.

In other words, without an affirmative right to vote, the right to vote doesn't seem to mean very much. States are free to target certain kinds of voters set up all sorts of obstacles to voting, and this Supreme Court seems more than willing support them.

No rights are unrestricted. Not the right to free speech, to own a gun, to vote.

I agree that voter ID laws are ill-disguised attempts to suppress voting.

But again, my point is that the right to vote is a Constitutional right. Not an affirmative right but again the Constitution doesn't set forth affirmative rights. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, hst2 said:

 States are free to target certain kinds of voters and set up all sorts of obstacles to voting for them, and this Supreme Court seems more than willing support them.

 

Guess who can fix that? The people that vote. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

No rights are unrestricted. Not the right to free speech, to own a gun, to vote.

I agree that voter ID laws are ill-disguised attempts to suppress voting.

But again, my point is that the right to vote is a Constitutional right. Not an affirmative right but again the Constitution doesn't set forth affirmative rights. 

Why would we restrict voting rights?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, bmore_ken said:

Guess who can fix that? The people that vote. 

Perhaps this is the will of the majority. Does that make it right? At one time it was the will of the majority in a number of states that some people not vote at all. It appears that we are still dealing with this.

Edited by hst2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hst2 said:

Why would we restrict voting rights?

We restrict by age, we restrict felons, we restrict by residency requirements, we restrict by method.

And think I was mistaken, there is one affirmative right in the Constitution, trial by jury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hst2 said:

Perhaps this is the will of the majority. Does that make it right? 

Perhaps?  So you have no idea how the people of this state feel about it?  This was legislation, not a vote of the people. The people have the means to change the law. A majority vote is how laws are passed. 

Edited by bmore_ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

We restrict by age, we restrict felons, we restrict by residency requirements, we restrict by method.

And think I was mistaken, there is one affirmative right in the Constitution, trial by jury.

Understand the need for restricting by age. Restricting felons is a Jim Crow policy that should be eliminated in states that have it. Residency is a requirement, but not what I would call a restriction. Method, too is more of a process than a restriction.

Its funny you should mention trial by jury. The vast majority of people going to prison don't have one.

Edited by hst2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bmore_ken said:

Perhaps?  So you have no idea how the people of this state feel about it?  This was legislation, not a vote of the people. The people have the means to change the law. A majority vote is how laws are passed. 

And the majority have passed laws that restrict voting in an increasing number of ways. That's what they want now, and its what they wanted in the Jim Crow era. One would have hoped that in this day and age, we would have passed that stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hst2 said:

 

Its funny you should mention trial by jury. The vast majority of people going to prison don't have one.

Who’s fault is that? There’s no restriction to a jury trial for anyone in this country. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bmore_ken said:

Who’s fault is that? There’s no restriction to a jury trial for anyone in this country. 

You're reminding me of Smokey,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This kind of flagrant voter disenfranchisement is happening because the USA is unwilling or too stupid to institute a modern verifiable ID system that is free and mandatory for every citizen.

Instead, we rely on flimsy techniques using drivers licenses and whatever else. Of course cynical goons are going to take advantage of the situation using voter fraud as a pretext for systematic disenfranchisement.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0