Skip to main content

View Diary: Open thread for night owls: John Roberts gets it wrong on black voting in Massachusetts (93 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't get his logic (7+ / 0-)

    If black voter registration is worse in MA, doesn't that mean the VRA should be expanded? If the law is having the intended effect, why argue it's unnecessary? And why pull out "gotcha" points without taking into account the vast difference in racial percentages and past history? WTF?

    •  nope if he can prove there is discrimination (5+ / 0-)

      against one person in one place at one time in the entire nation, then the law is obviously not working and should be thrown out.

      I am just surprised he did not throw "reverse discrimination" out there to show how the poor majority has suffered under the ruthless thumb of the minorities

    •  It's Funny Because You Swapped "Logic" fr "Excuse" (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jeff Y, Eric Nelson, DeadHead, MeToo

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Fri Mar 01, 2013 at 09:22:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  That's what alot of people think should happen... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jeff Y, Eric Nelson

      If I understand things correctly.

      In fact, four years ago when the Court first address this, they were expecting congress to take some action on it, which congress didn't do. Supposedly it's this inaction that's partially responsible for the sour mood some of the Justices are in regarding this case.




      Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us.
      ~ Jerry Garcia

      by DeadHead on Fri Mar 01, 2013 at 09:24:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  A reasonable conclusion, but not necessarily... (0+ / 0-)

      the kind of remedy the Court would be comfortable applying. If the Act discriminates against some states based on old data (it doesn't, and the act allows now-compliant jurisdictions to request an opt-out of Section 5), the truly proper solution is for Congress to rewrite the Act either with a new formula and data, or no formula and universal coverage of all States.

      The trouble here is in expecting the Justices (these ones, especially) to rewrite and expand what they see as an unconstitutional action, when they'd typically just strike it and leave rewriting legislation up to the legislature.

      "The Democratic Party is not our friend: it is the only party we can negotiate with."

      by 2020adam on Fri Mar 01, 2013 at 11:41:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  They would in fact do as you say in your... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DeadHead, 2020adam

        ...last paragraph. And Congress in its current configuration would not follow up with an expanded VRA applying Section 5 nationwide.

        Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

        by Meteor Blades on Sat Mar 02, 2013 at 11:43:28 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yep. Proving that Justice Scalia is indeed full... (0+ / 0-)

          of shit when he opines that African Americans are such a strong voting bloc that they scare away opposition to the VRA.

          "The Democratic Party is not our friend: it is the only party we can negotiate with."

          by 2020adam on Sat Mar 02, 2013 at 11:55:03 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (129)
  • Community (63)
  • Bernie Sanders (44)
  • Elections (35)
  • Hillary Clinton (28)
  • 2016 (27)
  • Culture (27)
  • Climate Change (26)
  • Civil Rights (23)
  • Environment (22)
  • Science (22)
  • Labor (18)
  • Law (18)
  • Barack Obama (17)
  • Spam (17)
  • Media (17)
  • Republicans (17)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (15)
  • White House (14)
  • International (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site