Since the fools who stayed home in 2010 helped Republicans win state houses and state legislatures all over the country, Republicans have tried desperately to cement their gains by making it as difficult as possible for for people to vote if they are poor, old, working, disabled, and especially black. Yesterday the US Department of Justice (DOJ) rejected South Carolina’s racist voter ID law as a violation of the Voting Rights Act.
The Obama administration’s civil rights office is stepping up its fight with the Southern states over voting rights, announcing it will block a new South Carolina law that would require voters to show a government-issued photo identification before casting a ballot.
The Justice Department invoked the Voting Rights Act on Friday and said the new photo-identification rule could deny the right to vote for tens of thousands of blacks and other minorities.
"According to the state’s statistics, there are 81,938 minority citizens who are already registered to vote and who lack DMV-issued identification," Thomas E. Perez, the chief of the department’s civil rights division, said in a letter to South Carolina officials. He referred to a driver’s license issued by the state Department of Motor Vehicles, the most common form of photo identification.
Under current law, a South Carolina resident who is registered to vote can cast a ballot if he or she has a voter registration card and a signature on the polling list, Perez said.
South Carolina was one of many states to enact new laws earlier this year that tighten the rules for voting. Last week, Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. spoke out against these laws, describing them in the words of Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) as "a deliberate and systematic attempt" to prevent millions of elderly, low-income and minority Americans from voting… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <LA Times>
This has been too long in coming, as I was getting tired if saying that DOJ was investigating Republican laws designed to disenfranchise millions of Americans, with nothing to show for it. Hopefully this will be the first of many such decisions.
Ed Schultz interviewed Bernie Sanders on this and other subjects.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
I agree with Bernie on every point he made, except one. He is mistaken that the payroll tax cut takes money from the Social Security Trust Fund. Both the CBO and the Director of the Social Security Administration have confirmed that both the current law, and all Democratic proposals to extend it, take money from other sources to replace it. This is an example of a Republican lie told so frequently that it has become widely accepted as fact. Even Bernie isn’t perfect,… but close. 🙂
15 Responses to “DOJ Rejects SC Jim Crow Law”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Disenfranchising the vote is far more wide-spread this time around than I’ve witnessed before – so concerning to me – the vote is so fundamental in the basis of “democracy” that we consider ourselves to be the adherents of and the world’s standard – that when we abuse it so openly as to make corporations “people” and disenfranchise votes – we’re fast losing our principles and the democracy that we claim to espouse. Sanders is great, but was it really an error he made – again we enter my weakness, the area of finances – I agree that the SSI tax ought to remain in the payroll taxes – and cuts should be made elsewhere – the arguments made by the right are ridiculous, but this one area of taxation is not the entire “payroll tax” is it? Aren’t there means of taxation that can be agreed on that won’t affect the SSI specifically? I’m sorry I tend to agree with Sanders – I hope I haven’t been duped as well – can you explain it further?
Lee, as long as the measure is “paid for”, every penny that is not collected to deposit into the Social Security account is deposited into the Social Security account from other sources. From an SSI solvency perspective, it’s neutral.
There’s talk that SC and Texas will use this case in federal lawsuit to have Section 5 of the VRA ruled unconstitutional.
Section 5’s “Preclearance” requirement does raise some constitutional concerns. SCOTUS punted on it once in 2009. But Justice Kennedy’s reference to “sovereign dignity” during oral arguments in the 8–1 decision of Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Holder (overturning a lower court ruling that had denied a small suburban neighborhood in Travis County, Texas from seeking a “bailout” from this provision of the act) makes me think they might not punt on it again.
Thanks for the info Rob, and for the clarification, Nameless.
I have no doubt that the GOP are rapscallions of mega proportions but the Democrats aren’t all that squeaky clean either. Witness the last election where ACORN was padding the voter lists with people who had been dead for sometimes up to a hundred years ago. I thought that kind of thinking became history with the passing of the Kingfish; Tammany Hall and well I guess not since Chicago land is still alive and well. Then there were the Black Panthers who became nothing but a bunch of corrupt; criminal thugs who were telling people how to vote at the end of a billy club. Got a car bumper sticker that’s anti Obama? People were actually arrested for some of these in certain states such as Missouri and various east coast states for example. Mind you some of them were derogatory but still that aside; what has happened to freedom of speech and freedom of thinking in America? Are we on the verge of seeing the Nazification of America? Big Schmile boys and girls as we get poorer and poorer due to the manipulation of every facet of life that has become a commodity so that the Banksters and the economists can maximize profit.
Hi Michael, I have no problem with anti-Obama bumper stickers – I do however, have problems with racism and any semblance thereof – make an intelligent sticker and it will be considered – no he’s not “squeaky clean” – but he’s an alcohol pad compared to a “flu virus – pandemic” like we have representing the other party – I’m very opposed to the NDAA – and am very anti any soul involved in government – including the pres. who may have been complicit in the destruction of our constitution, that is a very “problematic” reason anyone should be anti – any of those folks – and I will not vote against my principles – so either O has to do something about that – or I vote _ maybe socialist party? Marxist? Write in? – Those who abandoned the constitution – have abandoned me – and no longer get my support – easy as that!
Lee, the NDAA contains an escape clause. It passed with the included Amendment that it can do nothing to change current law. I know you are sour on Obama, but a Socialist vote is a vote for the Republican.
Michael, the so-called wide-spread padding of voter lists by ACORN has long since been correctly identified as a GOP lie. I have to give you Chicago. It was corrupted in the 1920s and never recovered. On the bumper sticker, there was only one instance. The bumper sticker pictured an aborted fetus and had the caption, “Obama, not babies”, encouraging the assassination of the President. This happened in Oklahoma, a VERY red strate. The man was not arrested, the confiscated bumper sticker was returned to the man shortly after it was confiscated. The officer involved took the bumper sticker initially because he felt it constituted a real assassination threat towards the president. Cooler heads prevailed and the motorist got his property returned to him. If you actually believe this stuff, may I suggest some reeducation?
We can only hope that the DOJ will find all similar la3ws to be unconstitutional as well.
Amen, Pope Jack!
If all this voter ID BS is because of voter fraud, then I think all these Republican/Teabagger states better pay attention to the DOJs pronouncement that there was neglible voter fraud. And where problems did occur, they were more misunderstandings than outright voter fraud. I would be more concerned with election fraud perpetuated by anyone — how about the Florida computer programmer that was asked to create software that could tamper with the voting machine tallies to allow Republican/Teabaggers to win! And there are others that we’ve heard about. This ID issue is nothing more than vote suppression and disenfranchisement of voters, mostly voters that would vote Democrat. Given what I’ve seen, thank goodness for pre-clearance, although it should never be needed in a perfect world.
And if SCOTUS gets involved, given that there are 5 Injustices, things will be in an even bigger mess.
Another matter that disturbs me is that every state does things differently and yet it is a federal election. That gives unfair advantage, or disadvantage if you choose, to one state over another. I don’t think the founding fathers had that in mind.
Lynn, voter fraud has been documented as less than one one-thousandth of one percent.
Allowing states to determine election procedures within their borders for their own representatives is exactly what they had in mind, subject to Constitutional limitations.
Well. the DOJ has finally gotten off it’s ass and done something! I just don’t want this to go to SCOTUS because who knows how that will turn out. Nikki Haley should be recalled with all her other Repub friends.
Amen to that, Lisa!