Safe Mode: On
COURT STRIKES DOWN TEXAS VOTER ID LAW

The Washington Post reports:

: " Texas Attorney General Gregg Abbott said that the state will appeal Thursday’s ruling to the Supreme Court, which is the next stop in a voting rights case.

“Today’s decision is wrong on the law and improperly prevents Texas from implementing the same type of ballot integrity safeguards that are employed by Georgia and Indiana — and were upheld by the Supreme Court,” Abbott said in a statement.

Texas is the largest state covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires federal approval or “preclearance” of any voting changes in states that have a history of discrimination. Because of Texas’s discrimination history, the voter ID law signed last year by its Republican governor, Rick Perry, had to be cleared by the Justice Department. The department blocked the law in March, saying it would endanger minority voting rights. Texas sued the department, leading to a week-long trial in July.

Tatel was joined in the Texas decision by U.S. district judges Rosemary Collyer, appointed in 2002 by President George W. Bush and Robert L. Wilkins, who was nominated in 2010 by President Obama."





I do not personally agree with voter ID laws but I do believe the state has the right to enact voter ID laws.



Added: Aug-30-2012 Occurred On: Aug-30-2012
By: KutKorners
In:
Politics
Tags: it's, really, a, win, for, freedom, but, the, right, will, say, it's, a, win, for, mexicans, because, of, the, way, the, left, ruled
Location: Texas, United States (load item map)
Views: 1024 | Comments: 84 | Votes: 2 | Favorites: 0 | Shared: 0 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 2
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.
  • Comment of user 'T0M65' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • Seems rather odd that Texas has to prove it isn't discriminatory. You'd think to should be a burden on the Feds to prove it was, though it wouldn't be that hard what with all those shackles and chains.

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (4) | Report

    • @joe prole http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/32/Us_s5_cvr08.PNG

      That map shows the states and districts that fall under the discriminatory status. What I'd like to know is how long they have to have that designation, seeing as how it was atrocities from the Democrats that warranted those restrictions.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (2) | Report

    • @ChumCannon Really?

      Those Democrats that you state caused restrictions, they are (R) now.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @joe prole The State of Texas was already in trouble with voting maps, this violated that. Since this violated something already there no further action was needed.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @ChumCannon

      Thanks for the map. I'm familiar with the burden requirement; I was being a bit facetious. But I'm with you; the way the rules were written 50 years ago, this federal pre-approval is in perpetuity, which is a burden the Supreme Court needs to wipe out.

      Here's the Act in Brief
      http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/051006VRAStatReport.pdf

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (2) | Report

    • @KutKorners I know that, it's almost as if they caused the mess that the Republicans now have to pay for, and the restrictions were implemented by a Democrat president, no less.

      If you take a looks at the results of the '64 election, it seems as though Johnson was punishing the states that didn't vote for him, minus his home state, of course.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • I'd be for a program that would make available free identification cards if there are requirements put in place to make photo ID necessary to vote. It could come out the estimated billion dollars each of the major candidates are to raise.

    People say that blacks will be hardest hit by having to own an ID? I say they will be better off, as it is the first step to landing a job, driving a car, owning a house, being responsible, etc.

    Instead of voting me down, tell me what is wrong with anything I More..

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (4) | Report

    • @ChumCannon exactly right!!!

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (-1) | Report

    • @ChumCannon No your right, most states have concessions for low income people and ID is free. What gets me is most have a DL so they can drive, those that go out to clubs must show ID to get in, If Erick Holder or President Obama cam to their town they would have to show ID to get in. You have to show ID to cash a Check. Great Idea. Voting is a Right! But you have to do what it takes to do it.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @ChumCannon I agree with what you're saying but you can't force people to get an ID so they can vote, it would be like forcing them to get an ID so they can practice free speech.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @BloodyStars So your issue is not really that poor people/elderly/whomever can't afford one, it's that they don't really even want one? That's not exactly the main contention of the left, but if that's your view so be it... it's just much more dismissible than the other excuse.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @ChumCannon i don't have a problem with the whole voter id thing. The problem I have is with the timing of it. If they want to do it, do it after this election. Not because it will effect the election one way or another, but because a program like this should be implemented correctly WITHOUT trampling on anyone's right to vote.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (2) | Report

  • There should be voter ID laws in all states. If the Democrats are so concerned about the poor, give them IDs. I'd prefer to minimize voter fraud.

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (3) | Report

    • @Megadeth But then the right would criticize the left and call it a hand out. But I agree. If the republicans are so afraid of voter fraud, they should pay for the poor to have them.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @Megadeth Do you realize how many actual cases of voter fraud there have been? It is something to the tune of 0.07% of the total votes cast. You righties are making it seem as if its a wide spread epidemic. I'm glad their ID laws were struck down. Florida did it too.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (-1) | Report

    • @Dear Leader The poor already have i d. It's the criminal aliens who don't. This whole issue is about democrats fear of losing a huge block of fraudulent votes.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @stevecore If you. Elieve that is true then why oppose the voter I d law?

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @lonewolf6972 Well, for one its against the Constitution (the 24th Amendment). Righties always preach about the constitution except for when its not in their best interests... and two, its not necessary. Why are you for it if its essentially non-existent? Are you suggesting that 0.07% fraud rate is swinging the elections? And thats from all elections in the last 10 years combined. Not in one year.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • wait a second, how can anyone be against showing id to vote? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THAT? I HAVE TO SHOW ID TO BUY ALCOHOL. You have to be 18 to use Tobacco? So one ID is ok but not ok for voting.
    EXPLAIN LIBERAL!!! why does that not make sense? oh ya you want illegals to vote and get free shit.
    liberalism is a disease.

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (3) | Report

  • There is no sane reason a person could oppose voters having to show ID. The idea that it causes 'undue hardship' is so farcical, it's hard to believe they even make the claim.

    We have to show our ID regularly for far less important things than voting for the leader of the free world.

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (3) | Report

  • Comment of user 'wormhole' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • That's great news for the party of voter fraud.

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • unreal

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • Nah, it a loss for the cabal of guys who want the plutocracy.

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Win

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Freedom for more illegals?

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Purple inked fingers would end all of this.

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • that is bullshit!! It is the duty of a country's government to verify that ONLY legal citizens are voting and that everyone is casting only ONE vote. Fuck this administration and the bullshit they stand on!! That shit needs to change!!!

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • The Obama admin has pissed me off so much that this time this independent will vote straight republican to make sure I don't accidently vote for a fucking democrat.

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • That state has a right to know who is voting in the state,sounds to me like they want citizens from other countries to vote and helping them do that might be called TREASON

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Republicunt cowards!

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (-3) | Report

  • Voter ID laws are a conspiracy of lies by Republican led states and districts to try to deny access to voting of DEMOCRATIC voters.

    It is NOT about trying to stop in person voter fraud - which occurs about 10 times a year - ACROSS THE ENTIRE COUNTRY.

    In areas where the Republicans are in control, they are trying to force voters to require forms of PHOTO ID to vote that they have NEVER been required to use EVER before.

    And the people who DON'T have photo ID are almost 95% democrats. Blacks an More..

    Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

    (-6) | Report

    • @Perfectchi "Blacks and the poor and the elderly don't have photo ID."

      But they do have money for a pack of smokes and a case of beer which they do have to show ID for.

      It's $20 for an ID here in Chicago which isn't shit. Even 15 year old kids have ID's nowadays.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (4) | Report

    • @MaDKroniK Not if you look older than 35.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @Perfectchi ya, that's complete horse shit!! Everyone has an ID, what a lame ass excuse

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (3) | Report

    • @Dear Leader Not here in Chicago everyone gets carded no matter what. You could be 65 and still get asked for an ID.

      There is no excuse not to have an ID especially because you need it for just about anything like getting a job and so forth.

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @MaDKroniK Wrong. If they look like they're old enough to buy whatever, they won't get carded. So you're saying that if you work at a place that sells liquor, you'd card an 80-year old??

      Posted Aug-30-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • Without ID's how does one apply for welfare, foodstamps, section 8. How does one get a job without ID? If stats are correct, a parolee ID card should be accepted problem solved.

    Posted Oct-8-2013 By 

    (0) | Report