Court rules that only US government can sue to enforce Voting Rights Act

Dr. Acula

Hail Hydra
Supporter
Joined
Jul 26, 2012
Messages
25,895
Reputation
8,697
Daps
137,372
So how would the government sue for voter rights?
And sue who exactly?
Sue states not protecting voting rights under the voting rights acts. The issue is, if you have republican control of the federal government, then literally you have no legal recourse if your voting rights are under attack. It's another step in steps they have been making for over a decade now of slowly disempowering your ability to participate in the voting process equally.

If Alabammy decides it wants to shutdown voting centers in every black district, you used to as an individual or some private group like the Naacp be able to bring Alabama to court in your behalf to address it. Now, theoretically, you need to convince the federal government, like a Trump administration, that they should sue Alabama for you. This is obviously a problem when the federal admin and the state have equal interest in your disenfrancisement. It's 2028 and the republican president wants to stay in power for another four years. He knows the black vote is always harming him and Republicans at the state level do their part to make sure the black vote is minimal, including using currently illegal methods. Would that republican president sue the state for you? Probably not.
 
Last edited:

Wargames

One Of The Last Real Ones To Do It
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
25,501
Reputation
4,593
Daps
95,675
Reppin
New York City
Sue states not protecting voting rights under the voting rights acts. The issue is, if you have republican control of the federal government, then literally you have no federal recourse if your voting rights are under attack.
Exactly, it’s bullshyt on a whole other level because damn near every constitutional right is based on protecting people from the government.

This would effectively end the voting rights the next time a Republican became the president, allowing red states to create a hole Democrats would have to dig themselves out of to repair what the republicans did.
 

Secure Da Bag

Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2017
Messages
40,670
Reputation
20,828
Daps
127,453
While courts at all levels have allowed private claims seeking to enforce the voting rights law for decades, this is an “assumption that rests of flimsy footing”, the opinion written by Judge David Stras, who was appointed by Donald Trump, said. The ruling dissected the law itself, finding it did not include specific language that allows anyone aside from the attorney general to bring enforcement action.

In a dissenting opinion, Chief Judge Lavenski Smith said that, though the courts may not have directly addressed the idea of private parties trying to enforce this law, it has repeatedly heard these cases, so it would follow that “existing precedent that permits citizens to seek a judicial remedy”.

The ruling is not simply an esoteric question of law: it would dismantle the primary mechanism voting rights groups use to protect against racial discrimination in voting, often in the form of lawsuits challenging electoral maps.

So. In the real world, you, us, the electorate, would get Dems in office, and WE demand that the 1st thing they do is fix the VRA so that anyone can sue if the voting rights are violated.
 

Dr. Acula

Hail Hydra
Supporter
Joined
Jul 26, 2012
Messages
25,895
Reputation
8,697
Daps
137,372
They do everything in their power to restrict us and Dems play along by being passive.
We are not a dictatorship yet. There is nothing the Dems could have done to prevent this. The only thing they could do is expand the supreme court. But that comes with its own problems. But the thing is, they wouldn't have had to do even that if Trump wasn't given three supreme court justices who have and will continue to pass things like this.

Despite all the Hillary hate, black rights would have been better protected. These are the facts. Folks gave three supreme court picks to the absolutely worst POS

Folks said this type of shyt would happen and folks kept up the "it's fear mongering" because nothing is ever real and what was true yesterday is always true tomorrow. Oh well. At this rate, it won't be folks concern anymore because these folks are working towards removing any choice from the population eventually. There will be one party and you'll be lucky to get to even pretend you can choose it. :yeshrug:
 

Wargames

One Of The Last Real Ones To Do It
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
25,501
Reputation
4,593
Daps
95,675
Reppin
New York City
We are not a dictatorship yet. There is nothing the Dems could have done to prevent this. The only thing they could do is expand the supreme court. But the thing is, they wouldn't have had to do even that if Trump wasn't given three supreme court justices who have and will continue to pass things like this.

Despite all the Hillary hate, black rights would have been better protected. These are the facts. Folks gave three supreme court picks to the absolutely worst POS

Folks said this type of shyt would happen and folks kept up the "it's fear mongering" because nothing is ever real and what was true yesterday is always true tomorrow. Oh well. :yeshrug:
The Dems have to keep winning consecutively until both Thomas and Alito step down. Next Republican President they will by default and this shyt won’t stop. It’s game over America. It might take 4-12 years to fix this shyt but we got to hold our nose and vote for Biden and who knows who is next.
 

Yzak

Superstar
Joined
Dec 12, 2019
Messages
3,414
Reputation
321
Daps
12,703
And what do the other parties do?

Nothing. They have NO power. So you have 2 choices.

Choose wisely. Not choosing at all will do less than nothing.​
Nah, there's more to life than choosing between two racist parties, both set on keeping Black people at the bottom.
 
Top