The ugly fight over Texas’ refusal to expand absentee voting in the pandemic is now at the U.S. Supreme Court’s door step.
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1314991
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1314991
1 Like
There are people who would stop you from voting.
6 Likes
The 26th Amendment argument is a good one, Maybe the newly-minted textualists Roberts and Gorsuch will bite.
Nah, who am I kidding?
14 Likes
Anyone visited the supreme court the past couple years? Is it true the portico has chiseled into it, “Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch’intrate”?
3 Likes
The court would likely have to fast track the case — a move that requires five votes — if it were to be decided in time for the November election.
Ya don’t say, especially since the supreme court fucks off for summer vacation from June 30th through October 4th.
3 Likes
I don’t see how this isn’t an equal protection case as well…old people shouldn’t have a more expansive right to vote than young people, regardless of the circumstances of the pandemic. I understand what Texas is doing, trying to block the democratic expression of it’s non-Republican (which means non-white) voters, which should also be a violation of the Constitution, as well as seen as morally wrong.
Here’s another reason Democrats really need to take the presidency and Senate and hold the House, it’s the only way we will see a new voting rights act, one that actually protects people and stops all of these efforts to block the ability of American citizens to vote.
10 Likes
The Fab Five will agree and then strike the provision that allows any voter 65 or older to vote absentee saying it’s up to the legislature to fix the problem.
6 Likes
So the GOP is trying to steal elections again and again…
4 Likes
And then the legislature will pass a new and different law that allows any voter 64 or older to vote absentee.
4 Likes
Time to tee up their Article I, §4 power to pass laws regulating the times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives.
3 Likes
Gee, my favorite part of the article was about the Texas AG threatening criminal prosecution of anyone urging people to vote absentee because of the virus. Might that be itself a criminal threat. If not, it should be.
7 Likes
This SCOTUS enfranchising voters? That’d be a first.
7 Likes
Gee can’t you take a joke? Don’t you know Paxton is a laugh a minute type of guy? You should hear him around the water cooler.
2 Likes
Repub desperate actions are best internal polls that they’ll get thrown out of office.
3 Likes
Once again I must call out a big LIE the mainstream media and TPM keeps telling the American people.
“A federal district court judge agreed with the Dems’ arguments, but that decision was formally put on hold earlier this month by the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.”
This was NOT a conservative decision. Conservative decisions DO NOT support voter suppression or disenfranchisement. Rather, this is a Republican decision whereby several members sworn to uphold the constitution instead said to hell with the constitution and we only care about a few rich white men holding on to power and god damn the rest of you.
3 Likes
Whether or not the Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit should be called “conservative” – if you want to make the argument so the writer can read it, you have to alert said writer.
In this case, Ms. Sneed: @tierney
2 Likes
It doesn’t matter what the GOP does. If Dems and Dem leaners vote, the GOP will lose. Fight to win the case, but don’t depend on it.
4 Likes
So the result is likely that over 65 year old voters in Texas won’t have the right anymore to vote by mail.
That’s how they can get around that.
And I"m sending money for the lawsuits. hahahahaha
5 Likes
Legal definition of "abridged "
Abridge Law and Legal Definition . In a generic sense the term “ abridge ” means to cut short. … In a legal context, the term is generally used to explain taking away or restricting some existing right of a person such as abridging the right to vote; or abridging the rights and obligations of an administrator."
If “abridged” leads to a discussion of “restricting” and therefore making access to the vote unequal well you can see where a rational court would go.
1 Like