Seven States Ask U.S. Supreme Court to Invalidate Section 5 of Federal Voting Rights Act

On February 27, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court will hold an oral argument in Shelby County, Alabama v Holder, 12-96. This is the case that argues Section 5 of the federal Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional. Section five is the part of the act that requires certain states, and certain governmental units within states, to get permission from the U.S. Justice Department before changing any election laws or practices.

Section Five has been upheld several times in the past by the U.S. Supreme Court, but opponents of Section Five argue that it is now obsolete. Recently, many amicus curiae briefs have been filed by opponents of Section Five, including the states of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Texas. See this web page, which lists all the amicus curiae briefs filed against Section Five. It is very likely that many amicus curiae briefs in support of Section Five will be filed in the next few weeks. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.


Seven States Ask U.S. Supreme Court to Invalidate Section 5 of Federal Voting Rights Act — No Comments

  1. The Justice Department will argue:

    Section 4 of the act provides that a covered jurisdiction may seek to “bail out,” or remove itself from such coverage, and therefore be exempted from the preclearance requirements, by seeking a declaratory judgment before a three-judge panel in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. A bailout judgment can be issued only if the court determines that the jurisdiction meets certain eligibility requirements for bailout contained in the statute, including a 10-year record of nondiscrimination in voting-related actions. The act also provides that the attorney general can consent to entry of a judgment of bailout only if, based upon investigation, the attorney general is satisfied that the jurisdiction meets the eligibility requirements.

  2. ALL of the VRA added on stuff is a perversion of the Constitution allowed to happen due to the robot party hack appointed SCOTUS folks being *politically correct* in the 1960s.

    See 14th Amdt Sec 2 and 15th Amdt Sec. 1.

    The 15th Amdt happened in the LAME DUCK Congress session in Jan-Feb 1869 after the bare election of Prez Grant in Nov 1868. [old lame duck sessions ended Mar 4]

    The Elephants wanted and needed the votes from black ex-Union Army/Navy men in the NORTH.

    i.e. the armies of MORON lawyers have been totally EVIL stupid regarding the NON-enforcement of 14th Amdt, Sec. 2 since 1868.

    The *shall not* stuff in the 15th Amdt is the same as any other *shall not* stuff in the Constitution — AFTER a violation there can be criminal/civil cases.

    IE — the Fed MORONS did not systematically go after every Federal/State/local robot party hack who violated the 15th Amdt, Sec. 1 the same way they should go after slavery folks (who violate the 13th Amdt) — or even traitors.

    The whole EVIL mess is due to the SCOTUS M-O-R-O-N-S who are brain dead ignorant of history and especially the English language – in the above 2 sections.

    For the clueless – 14th Amdt, Sec. 2 got MOST of the attention in 1866 – ALL folks with ANY brains could detect that the horrific Civil WAR had happened due to the ANTI-Democracy slave oligarchy in the ex-slave States.

    Such 14-2 was meant to have UNIVERSAL adult male suffrage — to have DEMOCRACY in all States.

    BUT such section has been ignored by MORONS since 1868.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *