Dept. of Justice: South Carolina vote...

Dept. of Justice: South Carolina voter ID law discriminatory

There are 3353 comments on the WMT-AM Cedar Rapids story from Dec 23, 2011, titled Dept. of Justice: South Carolina voter ID law discriminatory. In it, WMT-AM Cedar Rapids reports that:

The U.S. Justice Department Friday rejected South Carolina's photo-requiring voter-identification law, saying it discriminates against minorities.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WMT-AM Cedar Rapids.

First Prev
of 168
Next Last

“starting to wake up”

Level 1

Since: Apr 09

brookhaven ny

#1 Dec 23, 2011
why is this joker still have a job??

Judged:

17

11

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Level 8

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#3 Dec 23, 2011
The DOJ has no authority to nullify a state law. Only the supreme court can do that and i think that practice should end too.

The states are supposed to be sovereign.

BTW - if discrimination is illegal, why is affirmative action legal.?
Rem223

Andover, CT

#4 Dec 23, 2011
I wonder why the justice Dept. hasn`t sue`d Connecticut. The mandatory ID law has been in effect for around 10 years for those wanting to exercise their right to vote. Only exception was our last state election when anyone who not only wanted to vote could without any ID and vote as many times as they wanted.

This happened in heavily dumocratic mostly black areas of Bridgport. These irregularities were reported by Poll Monitors to the State Secretary a dumocrat who refused to act upon this fraud. Areas of the city ran out of ballots because so many were allowed to vote many times.

Maybe Holder only prosecutes Republican Governor run states, all seem to be in the south and southwest. Ironic or just plain racist by this Holder and the O`buma administration.
radiofreeamerica

Tampa, FL

#5 Dec 23, 2011
The obama administration will harass all states that probably wont vote for obama next year.It wont stop until obama is gone.Republicans must be united for this to happen.
Osama Obama Sucks

New Oxford, PA

#6 Dec 23, 2011
Holder still has his job due to Obama being just like him.2 of a kind,birds of a feather,both painted with the same brush.
Smokin Joe Obama

Wasilla, AK

#7 Dec 23, 2011
Election of Barrack Hussein Obama DISCRIMINATORY against MAJORITY AMERICA, CHRISTIANS and the western World.

“Uzi Does It”

Level 3

Since: Nov 08

UZILAND

#8 Dec 23, 2011
Speeders Kill Kids wrote:
The states are supposed to be sovereign.
This isn't about state elections, you dunce.
Dingo

Elk Grove, CA

#9 Dec 23, 2011
Stop smaking the MORON so hard.
.
but do continue.
Richard_ wrote:
<quoted text>This isn't about state elections, you dunce.
Teach

United States

#10 Dec 23, 2011
Speeders Kill Kids wrote:
The DOJ has no authority to nullify a state law. Only the supreme court can do that and i think that practice should end too.
The states are supposed to be sovereign.
BTW - if discrimination is illegal, why is affirmative action legal.?
The Supreme Court very recently ruled on a case brought in Indianna or Iowa...one of the I's, that requiring photo ID's is not a violation of anyones Constitutional rights and that the state is allowed to do that, as many states, including mine, already do.
Teach

United States

#11 Dec 23, 2011
Rem223 wrote:
I wonder why the justice Dept. hasn`t sue`d Connecticut. The mandatory ID law has been in effect for around 10 years for those wanting to exercise their right to vote. Only exception was our last state election when anyone who not only wanted to vote could without any ID and vote as many times as they wanted.
This happened in heavily dumocratic mostly black areas of Bridgport. These irregularities were reported by Poll Monitors to the State Secretary a dumocrat who refused to act upon this fraud. Areas of the city ran out of ballots because so many were allowed to vote many times.
Maybe Holder only prosecutes Republican Governor run states, all seem to be in the south and southwest. Ironic or just plain racist by this Holder and the O`buma administration.
The worst part is that it's the second election in a row where there were "irregularities" in that Bridgeport district and under the same supervisor. Ran out of ballots, and had to keep the polls open late, my ass.
Teach

United States

#12 Dec 23, 2011
Richard_ wrote:
<quoted text>This isn't about state elections, you dunce.
Huh??

Do you go to a different voting place when voting for a President? Voting laws vary from state to state, and they apply no matter what type of election it is. The Constitution reserves to the States exclusive authority over voter regulations and requirements, including federal elections. This decentalized system is unique to the U.S..
Dingo

Elk Grove, CA

#13 Dec 23, 2011
WRONG.
.
Federal Laws TRUMPS State laws.
.
Teach wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh??
Do you go to a different voting place when voting for a President? Voting laws vary from state to state, and they apply no matter what type of election it is. The Constitution reserves to the States exclusive authority over voter regulations and requirements, including federal elections. This decentalized system is unique to the U.S..
Teach

United States

#14 Dec 23, 2011
Dingo wrote:
WRONG.
.
Federal Laws TRUMPS State laws.
.
<quoted text>
Sorry, I'm not wrong.

Aside from suffrage laws, state law regulates elections, including most aspects of electoral law, including primaries, eligibility of voters, etc.

See Constitution, Articles 1 & 2, as well as various other amendments.

In 1975, the feds expanded their power, but that had to do with campaign finance laws (Federal Election Campaign Act).

Eligibility and regulation is a States issue, even for federal elections.

Again, the United States is the only country with this decentralized system for federal elections.
Mothra

United States

#15 Dec 23, 2011
Rem223 wrote:
I wonder why the justice Dept. hasn`t sue`d Connecticut. The mandatory ID law has been in effect for around 10 years for those wanting to exercise their right to vote. Only exception was our last state election when anyone who not only wanted to vote could without any ID and vote as many times as they wanted.
This happened in heavily dumocratic mostly black areas of Bridgport. These irregularities were reported by Poll Monitors to the State Secretary a dumocrat who refused to act upon this fraud. Areas of the city ran out of ballots because so many were allowed to vote many times.
Maybe Holder only prosecutes Republican Governor run states, all seem to be in the south and southwest. Ironic or just plain racist by this Holder and the O`buma administration.
"Maybe Holder only prosecutes Republican Governor run states, all seem to be in the south and southwest."

Like DOJ suing AZ over SB 1070, while not pursuing Rhode Island?

"According to the Obama administration’s lawsuit against the state of Arizona, their new law requiring police officers to investigate immigration status for those already in some form of detention violates their jurisdiction, which is what the argument of pre-emption means. Barack Obama and Eric Holder want the courts to rule that only the federal writ runs in Arizona on immigration-law enforcement. Apparently, though, the federal writ doesn’t run in Rhode Island, where law enforcement has been doing for years exactly what the Arizona law Obama opposes mandates — without a peep from the DoJ"

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/07/arizona...

Rhode Island voted for Obama.

I'm seeing a pattern.
Dingo

Elk Grove, CA

#16 Dec 23, 2011
YOU are WRONG.
.
Federal Laws trumps State Laws.
.
Deal with reality and stop blabbering nonsense like an idiot.
.
Teach wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, I'm not wrong.
Aside from suffrage laws, state law regulates elections, including most aspects of electoral law, including primaries, eligibility of voters, etc.
See Constitution, Articles 1 & 2, as well as various other amendments.
In 1975, the feds expanded their power, but that had to do with campaign finance laws (Federal Election Campaign Act).
Eligibility and regulation is a States issue, even for federal elections.
Again, the United States is the only country with this decentralized system for federal elections.
Dingo

Elk Grove, CA

#17 Dec 23, 2011
Awwww.
.
keep looking for that strawman.
.
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
"Maybe Holder only prosecutes Republican Governor run states, all seem to be in the south and southwest."
Like DOJ suing AZ over SB 1070, while not pursuing Rhode Island?
"According to the Obama administration’s lawsuit against the state of Arizona, their new law requiring police officers to investigate immigration status for those already in some form of detention violates their jurisdiction, which is what the argument of pre-emption means. Barack Obama and Eric Holder want the courts to rule that only the federal writ runs in Arizona on immigration-law enforcement. Apparently, though, the federal writ doesn’t run in Rhode Island, where law enforcement has been doing for years exactly what the Arizona law Obama opposes mandates — without a peep from the DoJ"
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/07/arizona...
Rhode Island voted for Obama.
I'm seeing a pattern.

Since: Feb 07

Whitman,Ma

#18 Dec 23, 2011
I guess that means no one needs an ID CARD. I have to show one to pick up my grand kids at school, when I cash my retirement check,to get onto a base since I am miltary retiree too, to see my doctor now I need a picture ID, and etc and so on. What is the big deal? The Democrats need more illegal voters to increase the voter fraud.
Dingo

Elk Grove, CA

#20 Dec 23, 2011
Awwww.
.
you such a poor whining sap.
.
http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/8849/rudolph...
Wake up USA wrote:
I guess that means no one needs an ID CARD. I have to show one to pick up my grand kids at school, when I cash my retirement check,to get onto a base since I am miltary retiree too, to see my doctor now I need a picture ID, and etc and so on. What is the big deal? The Democrats need more illegal voters to increase the voter fraud.
Mothra

United States

#21 Dec 24, 2011
Dingo wrote:
<quoted text>
Troll.
Dingo

Elk Grove, CA

#22 Dec 24, 2011
Awww.
.
I don't agree with you and you are vex
.
get over it.
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
Troll.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 168
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Immigration Reform Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Trump Isn't Bluffing, He'll Deport 11 Million P... 5 min 2all 10,453
News 5 Words Trump Forgot to Say in First Debate 1 hr bottlecap 12
News If Donald Trump Was President, Here's What Woul... (Oct '15) 4 hr barefoot2626 11,273
Rose's Pub (Mar '10) 4 hr Flaming Star 142,666
News Louisiana AG: We Have a Problem with Illegal Im... 5 hr ima-Ilis Myka Ash... 1
News Reagan, Bush 41, and the way we were...on immig... (Sep '15) 14 hr southern at heart 6
News Angelina Jolie slams Trump, warns against 'poli... 20 hr Well Well 6
More from around the web