Video: Holder: Voting Rights ruling a...

Video: Holder: Voting Rights ruling a "serious and unnecessary setback"

There are 73 comments on the CBS News story from Jun 25, 2013, titled Video: Holder: Voting Rights ruling a "serious and unnecessary setback". In it, CBS News reports that:

Attorney General Eric Holder vowed the Justice Department will "zealously guard" equal voting practices after the Supreme Court struck down a section of the Voting Rights Act, weakening a tool the federal government has used for nearly five decades to block discriminatory voting laws.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CBS News.

See the Light

United States

#26 Jun 25, 2013
Holder is really worried now, I'm sure he's wondering "what was Supreme Court ,Thinking, letting Republicans win at something" Brilliant of them in letting states decide their own voting laws. Now we can stop some states from Illegals voting.Democrats can't cheat so much.
Eric Gustafson

Virginia Beach, VA

#27 Jun 25, 2013
I don't know that some of you understand the ruling today given the comments.....

The ruling was simple, given that states don't use literacy test, and other extreme measures of 1965 racist measures to qualify a citizen to vote congress should have and need to update the formula to a more current example of racism practices to impede minorities in large blocks from participating in the vote.

Well since 2008, the new measures of racist requirements with the potential to impede citizens from voting is Voter ID, and gerrymandering Congressional districts.

Thought some of you may object to those new laws being racist, all that has to be proven in a Federal Court is the appearance of racism in denying minorities their right to cast a vote.

The process is a bit more lengthy in going through the court system but the meat of the law still stands.

The decision on the Arizona Immigration Law should have showed you that if nothing else. That law took time to wind it's way through the court system, but eventually is was overturned as will any created law in a State that denies Equal Access to fundamental rights, and Voting is a fundamental right in a democracy.
Eric Gustafson

Virginia Beach, VA

#28 Jun 25, 2013
See the Light wrote:
Holder is really worried now, I'm sure he's wondering "what was Supreme Court ,Thinking, letting Republicans win at something" Brilliant of them in letting states decide their own voting laws. Now we can stop some states from Illegals voting.Democrats can't cheat so much.
The ruling is that the Justice Department doesn't have to give preclearance, but the State Laws on Voting now can be brought directly before the Court by the Justice Department.

Only the preclearance section, Section 5 was ruled unconstitutional because of congress failure to update the wording to comply with more recent examples of discrimination and racism. The Court agreed that racism is still prevalent in America but no to the degree of which it was in 1965.

Since: Mar 09

The Left Coast

#29 Jun 26, 2013
Since when does Holder care about what the courts say?

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#30 Jun 26, 2013
Gary wrote:
<quoted text>
It was broader and included more progressive groups
than we were first told. Everyone was led to believe that
was just tea party groups that were being "targeted"
(at least they were the ones screaming the loudest),
but now we know that there was nothing special about
tea party groups. It was simply the IRS doing its job,
that is, asking these groups applying for tax exempt status
to justify it. Dirty pool!
Like when we file our taxes at the end of the year and
have big deductions for charity. The IRS expects people
to justify those exemptions.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aa....no fair!!!!
You can be sure Obama takes every deduction he can........but then so does everybody.

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#31 Jun 26, 2013
Eric Gustafson wrote:
I don't know that some of you understand the ruling today given the comments.....
The ruling was simple, given that states don't use literacy test, and other extreme measures of 1965 racist measures to qualify a citizen to vote congress should have and need to update the formula to a more current example of racism practices to impede minorities in large blocks from participating in the vote.
Well since 2008, the new measures of racist requirements with the potential to impede citizens from voting is Voter ID, and gerrymandering Congressional districts.
Thought some of you may object to those new laws being racist, all that has to be proven in a Federal Court is the appearance of racism in denying minorities their right to cast a vote.
The process is a bit more lengthy in going through the court system but the meat of the law still stands.
The decision on the Arizona Immigration Law should have showed you that if nothing else. That law took time to wind it's way through the court system, but eventually is was overturned as will any created law in a State that denies Equal Access to fundamental rights, and Voting is a fundamental right in a democracy.
If the Arizona immigration law is bogus, what about Washington and Colorado's new drug laws that fly in the face of federal law.

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#32 Jun 26, 2013
Eric Gustafson wrote:
<quoted text>
The ruling is that the Justice Department doesn't have to give preclearance, but the State Laws on Voting now can be brought directly before the Court by the Justice Department.
Only the preclearance section, Section 5 was ruled unconstitutional because of congress failure to update the wording to comply with more recent examples of discrimination and racism. The Court agreed that racism is still prevalent in America but no to the degree of which it was in 1965.
States can now push forward their voter ID laws and stop the fraud for the most part except in liberal controlled states and cities.........and the are going to vote for the free chit anyway.
spud

United States

#33 Jun 26, 2013
Eric Gustafson wrote:
I don't know that some of you understand the ruling today given the comments.....
The ruling was simple, given that states don't use literacy test, and other extreme measures of 1965 racist measures to qualify a citizen to vote congress should have and need to update the formula to a more current example of racism practices to impede minorities in large blocks from participating in the vote.
Well since 2008, the new measures of racist requirements with the potential to impede citizens from voting is Voter ID, and gerrymandering Congressional districts.
Thought some of you may object to those new laws being racist, all that has to be proven in a Federal Court is the appearance of racism in denying minorities their right to cast a vote.
The process is a bit more lengthy in going through the court system but the meat of the law still stands.
The decision on the Arizona Immigration Law should have showed you that if nothing else. That law took time to wind it's way through the court system, but eventually is was overturned as will any created law in a State that denies Equal Access to fundamental rights, and Voting is a fundamental right in a democracy.
Gerrymandering and requiring IDs to vote are both political and shouldn't be considered against the law. Both parties gerrymander but it's overwhelmingly the Democrats who are against voters having to produce IDs. This is not for any moral or legal reason. It's because they don't want to restrict illegal voters who will overwhelmingly cast their illegal votes for Democrats. It's funny how our AG, who finds nothing wrong with Black Panthers threatening elderly white voters at the polls in Philadelphia, will argue that having to show an ID in order to vote violates some imaginary voting law. He's not an attorney, he's a toady for the Democratic party.

“i hope we can change this!”

Since: Aug 08

usa

#34 Jun 26, 2013
holder is a serious and unnecessary setback
senior citizen

Granite City, IL

#36 Jun 26, 2013
Gary wrote:
The Ku Klux Klan has won the first round.
BS this law was written in 1965 - it is over 45 years old. If some one needs help - it is the new minority of the white male. The white males have get a National American Association for White People (NAAWP) to protect them from the Black Panthers and the voter frauds.

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#37 Jun 26, 2013
spud wrote:
<quoted text>Gerrymandering and requiring IDs to vote are both political and shouldn't be considered against the law. Both parties gerrymander but it's overwhelmingly the Democrats who are against voters having to produce IDs. This is not for any moral or legal reason. It's because they don't want to restrict illegal voters who will overwhelmingly cast their illegal votes for Democrats. It's funny how our AG, who finds nothing wrong with Black Panthers threatening elderly white voters at the polls in Philadelphia, will argue that having to show an ID in order to vote violates some imaginary voting law. He's not an attorney, he's a toady for the Democratic party.
it is so hard to dig up all those voters for an ID.
hay

Abilene, TX

#38 Jun 26, 2013
do you fools really think your votes get counted? HA!

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#39 Jun 26, 2013
hay wrote:
do you fools really think your votes get counted? HA!
Till you prove otherwise.

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#40 Jun 26, 2013
senior citizen wrote:
<quoted text>
BS this law was written in 1965 - it is over 45 years old. If some one needs help - it is the new minority of the white male. The white males have get a National American Association for White People (NAAWP) to protect them from the Black Panthers and the voter frauds.
If something is wrong with the bill and was unconstitutional, it is the liberals and their President Johnson that made it such. When they saw the south was turning right, they had to rig the elections anyway they could.
Kelly

Rochester, NY

#41 Jun 26, 2013
Our elections have become a joke. Number one, you need tons of money to even get on a ballot. Thus we have rich folks who want to control everyone else able to be elected. We no longer have a government with regular folks input. We don't even get a say on ballots anymore about huge alterations in our policy and Constitution. Until/unless we start with huge reforms including money limits on races and voter ID, nothing will change. So if we, the people, want democracy we really need to stand up to the powers that be that keep taking away our rights and say.
See the Light

United States

#42 Jun 26, 2013
Liberal's are the most racist, they don't even think of Illegal Aliens as people, they are just votes.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#44 Jun 26, 2013
Gary wrote:
<quoted text>
There is dignity in the act of voting. It makes people
feel like they are truly part of the country. This
KKK ruling by the Supremes will take away that dignity
and turn millions of Americans into second class citizens.
I can see massive demonstrations because of this.
It will be the 1960s all over again. And there will be blood.
There will be blood. For this reason as well as a great many others. The government has gone off the deep end and I don't see any way, other than revolution to get it back. I opt for non-violence, but I bet the other side will be as violent as they can get to protect their great wealth.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#45 Jun 26, 2013
See the Light wrote:
Liberal's are the most racist, they don't even think of Illegal Aliens as people, they are just votes.
What color tin foil hat do you need to read everyone's mind like that?

“Yeah, but...”

Since: Sep 11

MILKY WAY

#46 Jun 26, 2013
Eric Gustafson wrote:
There was never an issue with targeting conservative groups. Issa chose to not report all of the finding from the witnesses that testified and omitted that all groups applying for tax exempt status was investigated thoroughly to ensure they all were not conducting political activities as the legislation forbids.
This was another of the Republican schemes to delay and deny attention to pressing issues in hope the national economy cripples.
Every scandal has been a myth designed to delay congress from acting on pressing issues.
<quoted text>
Actually, no.
This all started when the IRS ADMITTED targeting conservative groups, in response to a question from themselves.

“The "entitled" =communist.”

Since: May 10

MY MONEY, come take it.

#47 Jun 26, 2013
Holder is a communist azz and his opinion is his and doesn't mean anything. You pukes who dont want photo id for voting are also communist. You need to leave. Dont you have some trees to hug.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Transgender Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Texas middle school teachers resign after anti-... 1 hr Baptist ism by Proxy 9
News a CDC ban on 'fetus' and 'transgender?' Experts... 7 hr Hudson 106
News Reading series teaches students about inclusion 8 hr Wondering 10
News Elite Consensus: How Transgenderism Became the ... 9 hr DifferentIsNotWrong 38
News Washington State Senate Approves Bill Banning '... 9 hr Rainbow Kid 7
News School assembly: Sex changes are "perfectly nor... 11 hr Grow a Heart 2
News VIDEO: Danica Roem's ceremonial swearing in 11 hr TerriB1 1
More from around the web