Government to Sue Texas over Voter ID Law

[bedstuy]

If Democrats can't steal elections, they'll sue to win.

This isn't really about elections, its the federal government (DOJ) stepping into state government telling them what they can/cannot do even though the courts said it was OK. That is tyrannical, Eric Holder would be sitting in jail right now if he was actually accountable for any of the unconstitutional things he's done. Its sad that the federal government and the executive branch have so much power now to put their political beliefs and force it into opposition/other party (in this case, Texas). It would be the same as a republican administration sueing California over something the democrats decide to do in their state.

So, you're just going to assert that the Supreme Court struck down all of the VRA, even after it was pointed out that Section 2 is still on the books and valid law.  Kind of hard to have a discussion about an issue when you can just ignore basic facts like that.

Also, if you're going to be that sanctimonious about the Constitution, let me point out that Texas is violating the 14th and 15th Amendments by practicing racial discrimination and voter suppression, not just the VRA.

As far as elections go, having of Voter ID law is NOTHING, the liberal outrage over this "voter suppression" is pathetic, you can go down to the DMV, or fill out paper work and have it mailed to you easily. Its not that hard, honestly. If a person can't get an ID than that's there own fault. You don't have to be smart to get one. I encourage anyone to fight me on this.

I'll fight you on this.

It's not an absolute barrier, sure.  But, it's completely unnecessary and has a disparate impact on poor folks and other marginalized groups. 

For example, let's say there's a legally blind person that lives in rural Texas.  You're going to make him or her arrange to spend a whole day going to a DMV that could be a long distance from their house to obtain an ID whose only purpose is voting.  That is a real barrier, especially if they're on a fixed income.  And what if they already have an ID, but someone steals their wallet a week before the election.  It's just not fair to take away their vote for no reason.  We have a system of voter registration and penalties that makes in-person voter fraud virtually non-existent.

[bedstuy]

I'll fight you on this.

It's not an absolute barrier, sure.  But, it's completely unnecessary and has a disparate impact on poor folks and other marginalized groups.  

For example, let's say there's a legally blind person that lives in rural Texas.  You're going to make him or her arrange to spend a whole day going to a DMV that could be a long distance from their house to obtain an ID whose only purpose is voting.  That is a real barrier, especially if they're on a fixed income.  And what if they already have an ID, but someone steals their wallet a week before the election.  It's just not fair to take away their vote for no reason.  We have a system of voter registration and penalties that makes in-person voter fraud virtually non-existent.

OK, I completely understand your point, but what they can do is call a family member or an aid to drive to the DMV (for example). What if they don't have family? Well they can call the police or walk to the local police station (if they have really good senses), and then they can issue you an ID for free sometimes, in most cases its 0$-20$. You would have to be living off the streets in most cases to not have $20. I suspect that most blind people have experience within their home/apartment/area to pick up the phone and call the police.

After all I'm not for photo ID, but I have a hard time understanding really rare arguments against it.

Some people in Texas live 100 miles from the nearest DMV, some of which are only open a couple days a week.  Is an understaffed rural police department going to drive someone 200 miles round-trip?  And, if the person lost certain required documents, they may have an additional trip and it could cost up to $345 in fees.  And what about a person who loses their required ID before the election?  And, sure, these obstacles are not insurmountable.  But, it could actually be an entire day of waiting and a missed workday to obtain an ID.  That's discouraging for many people.

We're also not talking about a small group of people here.  795,000 registered Texas voters lack a driver's license or ID.  The data also shows that Hispanics are twice as likely to not have an ID.  This is particularly insidious when Hispanics are much more likely to live in poverty, lack a car and can find interfacing with government bureaucracy more challenging than whites. 

[bedstuy]

If Democrats can't steal elections, they'll sue to win.

This isn't really about elections, its the federal government (DOJ) stepping into state government telling them what they can/cannot do even though the courts said it was OK. That is tyrannical, Eric Holder would be sitting in jail right now if he was actually accountable for any of the unconstitutional things he's done. Its sad that the federal government and the executive branch have so much power now to put their political beliefs and force it into opposition/other party (in this case, Texas). It would be the same as a republican administration sueing California over something the democrats decide to do in their state.

So, you're just going to assert that the Supreme Court struck down all of the VRA, even after it was pointed out that Section 2 is still on the books and valid law.  Kind of hard to have a discussion about an issue when you can just ignore basic facts like that.

Also, if you're going to be that sanctimonious about the Constitution, let me point out that Texas is violating the 14th and 15th Amendments by practicing racial discrimination and voter suppression, not just the VRA.

I never meant to assert that the whole VRA is gone, only section 4 got thrown out, so basically they left it up to those states (or congress can step in as well, I believe). But they will have to prove that Texas violated section 2. I don't believe it is a race issue, and that's my opinion, of course minority groups are less likely to have ID's, but that does not mean it was race intended, that is something they will have to prove.

Here are the 14th and 15th amendments:

14th: Defines citizenship, contains the Privileges or Immunities Clause, the Due Process Clause, the Equal Protection Clause, and deals with post-Civil War issues.

15th: Prohibits the denial of suffrage based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude

I am very much constitutional, but and I don't think its right to sue over these amendments over a voter ID law. Voter ID "suppresses" only a very small fraction (like 1/20th of eligible voters) of the population, something that wouldn't even put a dent in most elections. Most people who wouldn't have voter IDs anyway either don't care about politics/don't vote, or are so poor that they are in very bad condition (unfortunately). This also affects republican voters as well (just not as much), so it will be hard for the DOJ to try and prove the republicans in Texas wrong. I just don't necessarily believe that implementing a government voter ID is racial, its been done before.

You're wrong about section 2 and you clearly don't understand how the law works.  It's enough to have a disparate impact on a racial group.  There is no requirement of intent.  Don't make these wild assertions about the law until you've at least glanced at it.

And, it is true that poor and marginalized people tend not to vote.  But, this just makes that inequality worse.  The right to vote isn't something you deny anyone just because they don't comprise enough to swing an election, or you don't think they're powerful or rich enough to deserve a vote.  That's not how our democratic system works.  And think about it this way, people with drivers' licenses basically get the same right to vote as they did before, while 6% of the voters have to jump through a hoop just to exercise their constitutional rights.  How is that fair?