SUPREME COURT VOIDS KEY PART OF VOTING RIGHTS ACT

I WON’T PASTE THE ARTICLE HERE, BUT IF YOU WANT TO READ IT, HERE’S THE LINK: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/06/scotus_strikes_down_key_voting_rights_provision_comments.html#disqus_thread

THEY SAID:

FloridaCracker: Let’s ditch “Affirmative Action” while we’re at it.
Since we’ve decided the community in question now is able enough to register to vote and perhaps acquire a picture ID AND get themselves to the polling place, preferably the one where they belong, perhaps we can take their training wheels off and let them get jobs on merit and education, not skin color, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, or whatever else they’ve added to the mix over the years.

THAT REALLY IS THIS PERSON’S NAME

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dlanor: A corrupt Congress (instead of a corrupt Court) will now decide which Southern States should have the burden to prove they are full members of the union, such that they ought not be presumed to be saddled with more racists and bigots than are found in your typical, commie, open society, anti-american, blue state.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

MACinAZ: Another example of “Club Fed” wagging the dog.

  Another example of “Club Fed” ignoring the rule of law – and deeming the Constitution as being a living document to be re-interpreted by using social justice – thereby stripping the States of their rights.

  Our federal government is totally out of control – this “Club Fed” has overstepped it’s charter and become a domestic enemy of the people. I can give you 90 trillion very good reasons why this is so.

  Our founders are turning over in their graves, as are the millions who’ve given their lives in the name of freedom.

  We could not keep our republic.

  May God in Heaven damn Obama and his ilk to Hell.

reply Jerry_Rigger: God doesn’t damn anyone in spite of Jeremiah Wright”s prayers.  People damn themselves.  The Kenyan is doing that job quite well on his own.  Let’s pray he hastens the job.  He can’t split those gates soon enough for American Patriots.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dale+G: The sad thing is that four justices voted to affirm the idea that the sins of the father should be visited upon the son.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

buckhart: John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Mitch McConnell have probably already called Obama to apologize.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

dapicayune: So, Mr. Moran, is Reconstruction finally over now?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

journey: The outcome of the last election was clearly shown by allowing low IQers the privilege to “vote”.  “Voting” was determined by how large are the handouts.  This is not how a democracy can be maintained.  Of all the states, the South understood the blacks the best.  They held the last line in this country in trying to keep it white majority.  Now the country is run by idiots afraid of being called racists. There are millions more low IQers to be made “citizens” voting for more handouts.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Question Diversity: When thinking about this case, I put myself in the position of a Supreme Court judge. (Yeah, I know, from my mouth to Allah’s ears.)

The hypothetical me on SCOTUS would like to find for Miss Fisher, but I can’t think of any Federal Constitutional grounds to do so. Just between everyone reading these words and the gatepost, we all know that this Top 10% was done precisely as a seemingly non-racial end run around the concept of blatantly race-based AA, because we all know that the valedictorian of taco or ghetto high schools in Texas isn’t as worthy as someone from a difficult competitive white high school who finished one person below the top 10%. But what am I supposed to use as a rationale to find for Miss Fisher? Am I to use the doctrine of disparate impact? (Which the real SCOTUS will take up next term). Except I don’t think the disparate impact doctrine should even exist. If it shouldn’t exist to invalidate police and fire department entrance and promotion exams, then it shouldn’t exist to knock back this top 10% system either. The doctrine of strict scrutiny of racial classifications at law? First off, I think intermediate scrutiny should be used on race, and second, there are no racial classifications de jure in this case.

If there was some paper trail somewhere that proved that the authors of the top 10% policy specifically and explicitly did it because of race, then I suppose I could use strict scrutiny to declare it an illegitimate racial classification, if I was given to do that.

One more thing from SCOTUS: You’re reading a lot of hemming and hawing in the breaking news that SCOTUS borked the Voting Rights Act and namely the preclearance provisions. They did no such thing. All they did was order that the DOJ come up with a better, more timely more up-to-date formula on determining which jurisdictions have to do preclearance. They did NOT find the Federal government’s power to require preclearance of some jurisdictions but not all unconstitutional, much less find the whole notion of preclearance unconstitutional much less the whole VRA unconstitutional. IOW, in the heart of the matter, they found for the Feds/VRA.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

BernieGoetzFan: It is amazing how this is happening at the same time as the amnesty. All these non-whites will get quotas, of course.
Affirmative action really is forever now. Or at least until the Hispanics/Asians decide to stop giving quotas to blacks.

reply Spartacus: -My people have suffered historical abuse at the hands of white racists.
-Wait a minute, didn’t you just jump the fence yesterday?
-Well…Erm… RACIST !

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

JJCULLEN: Charles Whitman is the answer at UT Austin

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Funruffian: What is so blindingly pathetic about UT’s demographic is that Asians far outperform and earn their spots in the University in comparison to the overall residential population they hold. As Blacks get all of these assistant programs, AA quota privileges and racial preferences, they still make up less than half of the college campus in relation to the state’s Black population. If I were Asian I would be disgusted by the governmental support blacks receive who have hardly earned their admissions in relation to Asians.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dan Roodt: Initially when the news came out yesterday, it looked for a moment as if the SCOTUS had moved a few inches away from endorsing race preferences, but Jared’s disillusioning commentary is by far the best I have read so far.

He is also correct about the University having all the funds and the time in the world to litigate against white individuals whom a few smaller non-profits might assist in trying to defend their rights.

The one thing that struck me in reading some of the arguments of Miss Fisher’s lawyer last year, was the typical tendency of lawyers to be cautious and not tackle the issue head-on. As far as I recall, he did not attack the notion of “diversity”, but simply argued that UT was already diverse enough not to exclude Abigail Fisher on racial grounds.

This also happens a lot here in South Africa where we have to fight name changes and language discrimination (against Afrikaans) in the courts. Ultimately, one gets a sense of “winning the battle but losing the war”. Sometimes a case is won on some technicality but the principle is left untouched.

If it makes sense at all to litigate against the state or huge institutions like universities, almost against all odds, one should attack the core principle, such as “diversity” or race preference itself. Even if the outcome is then negative, at least the hostility of the SCOTUS against whites would have been revealed, the emperor seen to be naked as it were.

As things stand now, the issue has been fudged and the lower court will probably keep it that way. So UT will just invent another another abstruse requirement to exclude whites without actually calling it racial.

Some time in the future demographics will change and white students will be a minority on campus. At that stage universities will not argue that they need more “diversity” in the form of white students, but the remaining whites will be punished for “past privileges” enjoyed by their parents and grandparents.

I strongly feel that universities with their “tenured radicals” are leading the way as far as the downfall of the West is concerned. There must be some way in which they can be boycotted or isolated in order to neutralise them.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

WELCOME TO THE NEW AMERICA, WE MIGHT SOON BE SLAVES AGAIN.

DAVEY D. DID AN OPEN LETTER TO THE HIP HOP COMMUNITY HERE’S THE LINK:  http://hiphopandpolitics.wordpress.com/2013/06/25/open-letter-to-the-hip-hop-community-what-do-you-think-of-the-newrules-to-voting-rights/