On June 28, the Arkansas Libertarian Party submitted 18,667 signatures to the Secretary of State’s office. The party’s goal is 10,000 valid signatures. The law required 10,000 signatures between 2007 and 2018, but in 2019 the number was raised to 26,745 (3% of the last gubernatorial vote). The party has a lawsuit pending against the new petition requirement. If the party wins the case, it is extremely likely that it will be recognized once again. The hearing was on June 4. The decision on whether to enjoin the new law is expected soon.
1. SEPARATE IS NOT EQUAL. BROWN V BD OF ED 1954
2. EACH ELECTION IS NEW.
3. INDIVIDUAL CANDIDATES ARE NOMINATED.
4. INDIVIDUAL CANDIDATES ARE ELECTED.
5. EQUAL IN 14 AMDT, SEC. 1.
6. EQUAL BALLOT ACCESS TESTS FOR SUCH INDIVIDUAL CANDIDATES.
MUCH TOO DIFFICULT FOR THE MANY CLUELESS MORON LAWYERS AND WORSE JUDGES SINCE 1968 WILLIAMS V RHODES.
@DR,
Are sex-segregated facilities constitutional?
Justice / Prof Riley:
The SCOTUS MORONS have screwed up 14-1 since 1873 — Slaughterhouses cases.
1865-1866 ex-slave States pass all sorts of *Black Codes* —
keeping ex-slaves having NOOO or very limited *civil rights*.
39th Congress in 1865-1866– NOT amused.
Enacts USA 1866 Civil Rights Act — start of Cong Reconstruction 1866-1877.
MAJOR doubts about the constitutionality of such 1866 CRA.
Supreme court in KY declared it UN-constitutional.
14th Amdt sent to States June 1866 – declared ratified in July 1868.
1866 CRA re-enacted in 1870 law.
—-
Thus – IF a State has any sort of *unequal* classifications regarding *civil rights*, THEN the USA Congress may pass a USA law declaring such classification illegal via 14-5.
The MORON courts [esp SCOTUS] have corruptly ignored the 14-1 — 14-5 connection.
IE – 14-1 is NOT self-enforcing.
ONLY TWO main speeches on 14th Amdt in May-June 1866 – 1 HReps – 1 Senate.
39 Cong had a total work overload
– Civil War dead / wounded / widows / orphans – esp Union men.
Demobilization / War Debt / War inflation
about 8 ex-slave States majorly wrecked
— many ex-slaves starved to death in 1865-1866,
French intervention [Napoleon III] in Mexico — USA Army/Navy almost invaded Mexico.
—
Thus —
Are [State] sex-segregated facilities constitutional?
YES – until the USA Congress says NO.
—-
14-2 Right to Vote — ALL States
15 Amdt 1869-1870 – obviously based on 14-2 language.
Prez Grant barely elected in 1868 in some NORTHERN States —
having large numbers of black ex-Union Army/Navy men.
—
Too many useless rotted law skooools to count —
producing the MORONS who later get appointed to be *politically correct* SCOTUS robot party HACKS.
Demo Rep – was that a yes?
Reading 0001 for CL ASAP.
—
Thus —
Are [State] sex-segregated facilities constitutional?
YES – until the USA Congress says NO.
—-
How many State swim classes are sex-segregated facilities ???
Advanced genius folks —
Brown v Bd of Ed 1954 — UN-constitutional SCOTUS Op
due to NOOO USA law in 1954 requiring black+white State public education
— IF there was any State public education.
See again – the USA 1866 Civil Rights Act — NO mention of [optional] State public education.
Many northern States were highly racist in 1866 regarding *social* stuff in any sort of group meetings – forced or un-forced.
NOOO REQUIREMENT THAT ANY 14-5 USA LAW APPLY IN ALL STATES.
@DR,
I’m having a hard time following you. You are saying that Brown v Board was an unconstitutional decision? That is, the SCOTUS had no authority to enforce equal protection, since that is reserved exclsively to Congress?
But you are agreeing with the fact part of the decision that segregated schools violated equal protection, even IF they were equally funded because of past discriminatory history?
But you also seem to be suggesting that politically-segregated nominations in Arkansas violate equal protection? But the courts, particularly the SCOTUS have no authority to find this unconstitutional?
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/statutes-at-large/39th-congress/session-1/c39s1ch31.pdf
1866 USA Civil Right Act — Sec. 1.
Clause numbers added for clarity.
1. That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States;
2. and such citizens, of every race and color,
3. without regard to any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,
4. shall have the [[[ same right ]]], in every State and Territory in the United States,
5. to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property,
6. and to [[[ full and equal ]]] benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property,
7. as is enjoyed by white citizens,
8. and shall be subject to [[[ like ]]] punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none other,
9. any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, to the contrary notwithstanding.
—–
1866 Senate added Citizen 1st sentence in 14-1 based on 1. above – to overrule 1857 Dred Scott op.
2-3 Persons involved — note legal foreign aliens in USA NOT specified as *citizen*-persons
4-8 State *civil* rights involved
*******
14-1 does NOT mess with the definition of Elector in the States.
Combination of No Title of Nobility 1-9, 1-10, 4-4 RFG and 14-2 for *political* rights stuff –
[a] Voting and [b] political offices – elected or appointed.
Possible 14-1-14-5 enforcement for political offices – *political* rights also.
—
Thus – at moment —
NO 14-1-14-5 USA law regarding State public education or State public *civil* activities in general ???
NO 14-1-14-5 USA law regarding State public offices – elected or appointed ???
State General classifications of *persons* —-
Humans – age, sex, weight, height,
mental *intelligence* from A to Z, 1 to infinity, etc.,
physical – can lift 1 to 1,000 pounds — run a mile in 4 minutes or 4 years or never, etc.
Electors / NON-electors
Residents / NON-residents
USA Citizens in State, USA Citizens from other States, legal foreigners, illegal foreigners
Artificial persons – corps, props 1, 2 or more, etc.
INSANE to think that A-L-L State law classifications of A-L-L ***persons*** were abolished by 14-1 EPC.
Too many SCOTUS MORONS to count — with their LAWLESS use of 14-1 EPC in all sorts of ops —
ie being a *politically correct* super-legislative body — beyond the USA Congress and all State legislatures.
—
Note on race machinations —
see olde rotted stuff in some / many States — 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, 1/32, 1/64, 1/128, etc.
— shades of blackness/ whiteness.
Due to Father Sun photons and Mother Earth locations-
olde blacks in north latitudes becoming white ???
olde whites in south latitudes becoming black ???
Based on above 2 posts–
JR 1 — I’m having a hard time following you. You are saying that Brown v Board was an unconstitutional decision?
DR 1 – YES – unconstitutional – NO 14-5 USA law being enforced about no racist stuff in State public education.
JR 2 That is, the SCOTUS had no authority to enforce equal protection, since that is reserved exclusively to Congress?
DR 2 – YES see DR 1
JR 3 But you are agreeing with the fact part of the decision that segregated schools violated equal protection, even IF they were equally funded because of past discriminatory history?
DR 3 – NO. See DR 1
JR 4 But you also seem to be suggesting that politically-segregated nominations in Arkansas violate equal protection?
DR 4 – YES – IF a 14-5 law says so.
JR 5 But the courts, particularly the SCOTUS have no authority to find this unconstitutional?
DR 5 – Such a 14-5 law would give such authority.
—
MAJOR SCOTUS failure in FIRST 14-1 case in 1873 to review ALL of the 1865-1866 racist stuff in the States and the anti-racist reactions in the 39th Congress in 1865-1866.
———–
How much racist stuff in *civil* and *political* rights in Northern / Western States in 1865-1866 ???
Related matter – ballot access for the Elephants in 1854-1865 in ALL States – esp. rebel States and border slave States – DE, MD, KY, MO — even with the then private printed ballots.
How many very brave printers of Elephant ballots got killed / injured / fled for their lives out of the slave States in 1854-1865 ???
ANY *official* ballots before 1888-1890 ???
— ie having party hack nominees via caucuses / conventions [before *official* primaries] ???
@DR,
If the SCOTUS did not have jurisdiction in Brown v Board, what does it matter what the court’s opinion with regard to segregated schools?
Should Earl Warren have been impeached?
“Reading 0001 for CL ASAP.” – Demo Rep
Gosh, I took the Evelyn Woods speed reading course many years ago but it doesn’t help much with unintelligible crappola that SHOUTS so much.
JR 6 If the SCOTUS did not have jurisdiction in Brown v Board, what does it matter what the court’s opinion [was] with regard to segregated schools?
DR 6 The race mystification in Brown was extended to more mystifications in all sorts of other classifications since 1954 – ballot access, gerrymanders / minority rule, sex, etc.
JR 7 Should Earl Warren have been impeached?
DR 7 – Technically YES — but much better to have enacted a 14-5 law about NO racist stuff in State public education- barely possible in 1954 ??? or perhaps by 1961-1962 ??? or by 1965-1966 ???
—
Until about 1936 the SCOTUS MORONS used the 14-1 due process clause to be a super-legislature.
Since 1936 the SCOTUS MORONS have used the 14-1 equal protection clause to be a super-legislature.
Brain dead ignorance about 14-1 and 14-5 connection in both events.
State General classifications of *persons* — Also
Income / Assets / Net Worth —
IE ALL sorts of money now needed to get those govt *privileges* and *rights* —
esp in business.