To my Arizona friends

Van Johnston

Van Johnston

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
1,620
Location
South Texas
Display Name
Display name:
Van Johnston
Other recent Supreme Court decisions have drowned out any discussion of this interesting case of conflict between power 'of the people' vs strick constitutionalism.

Read the full opinion here, including always insightful and entertaining Scalia and Thomas dissents.

:stirpot:
 
Do you have the cliff notes version? That doc is 81 pages.
 
First page summarizes the argument. Next 3 pages summarize the majority's rationale and ruling. The dissents are summarized in the last para or two of each.
 
dans2992 said:
Do you have the cliff notes version? That doc is 81 pages.
Click to expand...

Az redistricting case. State constitution puts voter referendums equal to the legislature.

Voters appointed an independent committee to avoid gerrymandering, legislature didn't like it, appealed on.US Constitution grounds of elections being up to the state legislature.SCOTUS pointed out the plain text second half of the same clause, which said Congress could change manner of elections by law.

Turns out, Congress had passed a law turning elections into a matter decided by each state's constitution.

AZ legislature didn't like that too much.
 
California voters have adopted redistricting commissions too. Does this mean we can keep them?
 
warthog1984 said:
That seems to indeed be the result.
Click to expand...

And as long as nobody checks to confirm the person attempting to vote is the person registered to vote, elections will still be fraudulently decided.
 
Last edited:
As long as people who are eligible to vote are prevented from doing so, elections will still be fraudulently decided.
 
Palmpilot said:
As long as people who are eligible to vote are prevented from doing so, elections will still be fraudulently decided.
Click to expand...

Does that include dead people in some districts?
 
warthog1984 said:
Az redistricting case. State constitution puts voter referendums equal to the legislature.

Voters appointed an independent committee to avoid gerrymandering, legislature didn't like it, appealed on.US Constitution grounds of elections being up to the state legislature.SCOTUS pointed out the plain text second half of the same clause, which said Congress could change manner of elections by law.

Turns out, Congress had passed a law turning elections into a matter decided by each state's constitution.

AZ legislature didn't like that too much.
Click to expand...

As a general rule I am in favor of anything that give the people power over the politicians.
 
EdFred said:
Dead people are citizens in some places.
Click to expand...

How does the number of dead people voting compare to the number of live eligible voters who are prevented from voting?
 
Palmpilot said:
How does the number of dead people voting compare to the number of live eligible voters who are prevented from voting?
Click to expand...

Where are these people being prevented from voting? I mean forcefully prevented. "Oh **** I've got a warrant and there's police nearby I better not go vote" doesn't count.
 
Palmpilot said:
I thought citizenship requirements were determined by the U. S. Constitution.
Click to expand...

It's been a while since the supreme court was anything but a weather vane for progressives.
 
Iraq holds better elections than we do. Dip your finger in the ink and place it on the ballot, stick it in the box, and don't come back
 
Florida Cracker said:
And as long as nobody checks to confirm the person attempting to vote is the person registered to vote, elections will still be fraudulently decided.
Click to expand...

That is why we need to have voter ID laws where you need to have a picture ID that proves who you are and that the information matches the voter rolls.
 
Mason said:
As a general rule I am in favor of anything that give the people power over the politicians.
Click to expand...

So am I, but in this case the issue was that the text of the Constitution explicitly conflicts with that general rule. Read the Roberts dissent. Where do you draw the line between explicit words in the doc written 225 yrs ago, and what makes sense today?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top