Shameful testimony by a hired DOJ expert witness. Full story here.
“He noted that voters have to scrounge up postage, an extra hassle. It’s 70 cents in Denver (two stamps) but varies by county based on the ballot’s weight.”
“That will soon no longer be the case, as, after a recent spate of board actions, local residents are set to come face-to-face with a voting system that to this point has been virtually unknown.
On Thursday, the Castaic Union School District became the latest local agency to sign off on a shift to cumulative voting.
The Castaic district’s move was prompted, at least partly, by the possibility of legal action brought under the California Voting Rights Act, such as the lawsuits that were filed last year against the city of Santa Clarita, Santa Clarita Community College District and Sulphur Springs School District.”
This story is stunning. After Judge Edith Jones gave a speech to the Federalist Society chapter and criticized the Justice Department and opposition to the death penalty, an ethics complaint was filed against her. Now we know who the complaining parties are, and they are some of the so-called “civil rights” groups. The story demonstrates the hostility to free speech so common on the left, and how speech regulators are keen to use the boot of government to stamp out dissent or criticism.
We now know the identity of the complaining parties as they have “appealed” (called a “Petition for Review” under the relevant rules) and they have made their appeal public. The complaining parties are: League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), by Luis Roberto Vera, Jr.; NAACP – Austin Chapter, by Nelson E. Linder; National Bar Association, Dallas Affiliate – J.L. Turner Legal Association, by Tatiana Alexander; Texas Civil Rights Project (TCRP), by James C. Harrington; La Union del Pueblo Entero (LUPE,) by Juanita Valdez-Cox; Charles W. Wolfram, Professor Emeritus, Cornell Law School; Author, Modern Legal Ethics; Renato Ramirez; Professor Robert P. Schuwerk, Co-Author, Handbook of Texas Lawyer and Judicial Ethics; Susan Martyn, Distinguished Professor of Law & Values, University of Toledo College of Law; Ronald Minkoff, Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz; Past President, Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers; Ellen Yaroshefsky, Clinical Professor and Director, Burns Center for Ethics in the Practice of Law, Cardozo School of Law.
Is Holder crying wolf?
A year-long investigation by the district attorney’s office into alleged voter irregularities in the 2013 Hattiesburg Mayoral Election has resulted in seven indictments by the Forrest County Grand Jury. District Attorney Patricia Burchell issued a news release on Friday confirming that seven people have been indicted on misdemeanor charges, after two grand juries determined there was sufficient evidence of illegal voter activity.
The court ordered a re-do of the contested mayoral election, decided by a 37-vote margin, based on evidence of mishandled absentee ballots and illegal voting that included voter impersonation, voting by ineligible felons, and even “a 17-year-old voted absentee from the county jail.”
From PJ Tatler:
Overnight the Supreme Court refused to reverse the stay imposed by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and thus allowed voter ID to be required in the mid-term election in Texas. This is procedural delay based on the idea that election rules shouldn’t change at the last second.
So voter ID gets one last hurrah in Texas.
But election integrity advocates shouldn’t celebrate too much. Texas Voter ID is doomed. After this next election, it is prohibited from being used.
Nor should much faith be placed in any appeal. The plaintiffs won on two separate theories under the Voting Rights Act, and both are fatal to the law. First, the court ruled that Texas voter ID was enacted with a discriminatory intent. That finding alone dooms the law. And here’s the bad news: the chances of that finding being overturned are next to zero. Proving discriminatory intent isn’t easy, but the court said the plaintiffs did it. That’s a fact-based determination and will not be overturned unless it is clearly erroneous. Appeals courts are deferential to lower courts on fact findings. Why? Because lower courts conduct the trial. Lower courts see the witnesses, even if they sweat and squirm. Appeals judges sitting in New Orleans can’t size up the witnesses like the lower court judge in Corpus Christi.
Second, Texas also lost on the results prong under the Voting Rights Act. The plaintiffs pushed an outlandish theory for sure, and one that might get overturned on appeal. They pressed the novel idea that any statistical disparity of the impact of voter ID dooms the law. If blacks have ID less than whites, game over. The problem is that the courts have so far rejected that idea. You can be sure the Supreme Court will also.
But so what? The intent finding stands and that means that the Texas law likely gets one last hurrah in two weeks.
What’s the solution? For Texas to pass a new ID law lickety split. A new law can be in place within a few days of the Texas legislature convening in January. Pass something identical to the law approved in South Carolina or Georgia, and it’s lights out for the foes of election integrity.
Article printed from The PJ Tatler: http://pjmedia.com/tatler
“The government’s response to Ebola has become one of the most important, and passionate, issues of the mid-term elections. Surveys show the overwhelming majority of Americans are paying attention, and are worried.
Yet one million Americans have already surrendered their voice on the issue because they voted early.”
One of the many problems with vote by mail is that it is managed by one of the least popular and most inefficient companies in America: the United States Postal Service. When states utilize vote by mail, they decide to put the outcome of their elections into the hands of the federal government. The same people who brought you your neighbor’s mail will now be handling your ballot.
I encountered what reliance on the USPS can bring when I got my rain soaked and water destroyed mail this week: