tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8343794288200969109.post459469731458743942..comments2023-10-31T04:31:11.661-07:00Comments on Virgo Gumbo: Don't Let the Distractions Fool You (Paula Deen, Rachel Jeantel and the Voting Rights Act)Evan B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/06823332873271854715noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8343794288200969109.post-7544671051815334602013-06-28T11:38:37.082-07:002013-06-28T11:38:37.082-07:00Also,
This was a good article. Also, <br />This was a good article. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15269982659401287939noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8343794288200969109.post-72769977038915017422013-06-28T11:37:31.764-07:002013-06-28T11:37:31.764-07:00The voting rights act is provided for under sectio... The voting rights act is provided for under section 5 of the 14th amendment. <br /><br />"Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."<br /><br />The appropriateness of legislation is determined by the Supreme Court. Section 4 carried a series of bailout clauses that were requirements to get off the list. <br /><br /><br />No test or device has been used within the jurisdiction for the purpose or with the effect of voting discrimination;<br />All changes affecting voting have been reviewed under Section 5 prior to their implementation;<br />No change affecting voting has been the subject of an objection by the Attorney General or the denial of a Section 5 declaratory judgment from the District of Columbia district court;<br />There have been no adverse judgments in lawsuits alleging voting discrimination;<br />There have been no consent decrees or agreements that resulted in the abandonment of a discriminatory voting practice;<br />There are no pending lawsuits that allege voting discrimination; and<br />Federal examiners have not been assigned;<br />There have been no violations of the Constitution or federal, state or local laws with respect to voting discrimination unless the jurisdiction establishes that any such violations were trivial, were promptly corrected, and were not repeated.<br /><br />This is the kicker:<br />"There are no pending lawsuits that allege voting discrimination". <br /><br />Mckinney sued the state of Georgia because they had an open primary, and she argues that she lost the election because republicans were allowed to vote in the democratic party primary, thereby tipping the primary. She attempted to use the voting rights act as a vehicle to argue against a legitimate practice guaranteed to states under the 10th amendment. There is no constitutional requirement for states to give special restrictions on voting based on political party. Political parties are not even discussed in the Constitution. <br /><br />The voting rights act, especially section 4, places unconstitutional restrictions on states by mandating that they cannot be free from federal oversight if a case has been brought against them. Under a federation, the central government cannot dictate to states how they ought to conduct their elections, so long as they uphold the constitutional requirements, such as the 14th amendment. <br /><br />There is no way to determine if open primaries, or other legal practices will result in societal discrimination. However, cases can be brought to the courts, and these cases can prevent states from being bailed out from section 5. If there is no meaningful way to get out of section 5, and a perpetual state of federal oversight can be propagated by endless law suits, then states could be bound to it indefinitely. That is a fundamental violation of the 10th amendment.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15269982659401287939noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8343794288200969109.post-41735060717259837052013-06-28T11:33:28.784-07:002013-06-28T11:33:28.784-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15269982659401287939noreply@blogger.com