The U.S. Supreme Court struck down the latest redistricting plan from North Carolina on Monday, holding that the state Legislature had impermissibly used race in the redistricting process for two congressional districts.
He has revealed one of the biggest vulnerabilities in American elections, one that exists entirely because of the Motor Voter law.
If you think that the politicians who now run our government are bad, how about a system with leaders chosen by people too lazy even to register to vote?
Did you know that voter-ID cards caused last week's police-involved shooting of an unarmed black man? This incredible revelation comes courtesy of the No. 3 Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives, James Clyburn of South Carolina. Responding to the five bullets that North Charleston police officer Michael Slager fatally fired into the back of a black man named Walter Scott, Mr. Clyburn blamed this bloody mess on none other than the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and its work for ballot integrity. The U.S. House Assistant Minority Leader, Mr. Clyburn explained to "Hardball" host Chris Matthews, thanks to "ALEX [sic] . . . a climate has been created in the country that's causing these things to occur all over." Clyburn continued: They have drawn up these legislations [sic], pieces of legislation like stand your ground, that legislation gives a license for people to be vigilantes. They are the ones that are drawing up all of these, uh, so-called voter-ID laws. They are the ones that have been drawing up these unfair redistricting plans. These people are a cancer eating at the inners [sic] of our society. So, photo-ID requirements are not just disenfranchising blacks who, supposedly, are incapable of possessing or even requesting them before they visit the polls. Now, voter ID is responsible for gunning down a black man.
The Supreme Court has dealt a heavy blow to efforts -- often by the Republican Party -- to draw legislative districts that pack black voters into majority black legislative districts in order to elect black representatives. In a case decided today arising out of Alabama state legislative plans, the Supreme Court held that the Voting Rights Act does not require the preservation and protection of legislative districts with percentages of black voters designed to produce black elected officials. Republicans and black politicians often argue that the Voting Rights Act requires line drawers to preserve proportional black representation by creating districts where black candidates are sure to win election. These plans help Republicans by bleaching out surrounding areas helping to elect Republicans. Instead, the Court ruled that what must be preserved is the "ability to elect" minority preferred candidates of choice -- who need not necessarily be minority candidates themselves. This means legislatures can dip below numeric thresholds which create majority black districts, and not necessarily offend the Voting Rights Act.
J. Christian Adams warns that, "Something is happening in Colorado, and you better pay attention. Colorado Democrats, with the active help of some Republican county election clerks interested in shirking work, have devised a revolutionary plan to remake future Colorado elections. "The plan is simple - ballots are automatically mailed out to every single person on the voter rolls. Ballots are even mailed to people listed as "inactive" voters at their last known address. Ballots are then voted and returned by mail. No more polling places. No more voters actually demonstrating an interest in participating in an election."
Pretty soon, the right to cast a meaningful vote might be just a memory. The issue at hand is ensuring that American citizens can exercise the most fundamental civil right of being an American.
Former U.S. Solicitor General Clement told U.S. Supreme Court justices that lower federal courts cannot redraw state-approved election district maps unless they can point to concrete "identifying specific statutory or constitutional violations."
The most consequential election in our lifetime is still 10 months away, but it's clear from the Obama administration's order halting South Carolina's new photo ID law that the Democrats already have brought a gun to a knife fight. How else to describe this naked assault on the right of a state to create minimal requirements to curb vote fraud?
Is it racist to require people to show a photo ID when they vote? You need a photo ID for nearly any meaningful transaction, such as cashing checks, including government checks. If this simple requirement "suppresses" the vote, maybe we need to ask why it's such a great idea to push for universal suffrage for every adult who is merely breathing. Of course, even this latter requirement would suppress the vote in Chicago and New Orleans, where dead people get to vote all the time - and do so cheerfully.