Supreme Court strikes down voter registration laws - Illegals win again.

[JakeStarkey]

Learning what "federalism" and how it applies to the Constitution is personal: every citizen should understand.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Wrong again, as usual:

Just as importantly, NOBODY is an "illegal" until so judged in a court of law.

You do know that it is possible to do something that is illegal without being convicted, right?

Nope. It may be unethical. it may be immoral. It may be reprehensable. But, as an example, under the law, O.J. Simpson is, in fact, innocent of murder.

 

[Mertex]

Following the letter of the law is a bit of a stickler for him.

He said that Arizona simply went about it the wrong way.

He said essentially....try again.

and that is most likely the answer the state wanted in the first place

Hardly want we wanted....it will be two more years (and another federal election) at least before the Supremes will hear another legal challenge to the Soetoro Gang's open-border/voter registration policy. In that time, another million illegals will be encamped inside our borders.

THANKS Scalia et al....you've once again nitpicked a well-intentioned attempt to control our ballot box.

Funny, most conservatives seem to claim they like to follow the Constitution to the letter of the law - yet, you are more concerned about controlling the ballot box than what the Constitution says about our rights as voters. Is that what conservatives classify as "Patriots"?

 

[paulitician]

Big Brother. He's always there to help. But who's he helping these days? Surely not Americans.

 

[ClosedCaption]

TK was coaching another poster, CC, who followed his advice and got disappeared as a result.

Of course he was teaching bitchassness to all the bitches. Lol he's a black belt in hoejitsu.

Nice sig!

Thanks!

 

[ShootSpeeders]

No - i'm willing to stick with the constitution. It makes it clear that the states are above the federal govt.

Clearly a false belief, and one that Scalia, Thomas, and Alito would throw in your face.

Then explain the tenth amendment. And ...

THINK

 

[ShootSpeeders]

How many times must we explain this to you? Illegals have NO constitutional rights. The first seven words of the C are "We the people of the United States". That makes it clear that whenever the C uses the words "people" or "person", they mean citizens.

Case law does not agree with you. We, citizens and non-, are all subject to and protected by the Constitution and the laws.

Can't change it, podjo.

You want to change the constitution then go thru the amending process. The SCOTUS can't change it and then call it case law and say it can't be challenged.

 

[JakeStarkey]

How many times must we explain this to you? Illegals have NO constitutional rights. The first seven words of the C are "We the people of the United States". That makes it clear that whenever the C uses the words "people" or "person", they mean citizens.

Case law does not agree with you. We, citizens and non-, are all subject to and protected by the Constitution and the laws.

Can't change it, podjo.

You want to change the constitution then go thru the amending process. The SCOTUS can't change it and then call it case law and say it can't be challenged.

That's an argument that the courts have shot down time and again.

SCOTUS opines on the law, and you get to obey it.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

You want to change the constitution then go thru the amending process. The SCOTUS can't change it and then call it case law and say it can't be challenged.

That's an argument that the courts have shot down time and again.

SCOTUS opines on the law, and you get to obey it.

Exactly. The unelected scotus says it has final say on every issue and no one can disagree with them!!!! The constitution gives them no such authority. They just grabbed it from the states.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You want to change the constitution then go thru the amending process. The SCOTUS can't change it and then call it case law and say it can't be challenged.

That's an argument that the courts have shot down time and again.

SCOTUS opines on the law, and you get to obey it.

Exactly. The unelected scotus says it has final say on every issue and no one can disagree with them!!!! The constitution gives them no such authority. They just grabbed it from the states.

Whatever. The doctrine of judicial review is republican, it is constitutional, and it is what it is.

Live with it.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Learning what "federalism" and how it applies to the Constitution is personal: every citizen should understand.

No.."you must have a comprehension problem"....That's personal.
Now, do you want to lose a battle of insults or have a debate.
Your move.

 

[thereisnospoon]

and that is most likely the answer the state wanted in the first place

Hardly want we wanted....it will be two more years (and another federal election) at least before the Supremes will hear another legal challenge to the Soetoro Gang's open-border/voter registration policy. In that time, another million illegals will be encamped inside our borders.

THANKS Scalia et al....you've once again nitpicked a well-intentioned attempt to control our ballot box.

Funny, most conservatives seem to claim they like to follow the Constitution to the letter of the law - yet, you are more concerned about controlling the ballot box than what the Constitution says about our rights as voters. Is that what conservatives classify as "Patriots"?

The misconception on the part of the left is that voting rights are absolute.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You want to change the constitution then go thru the amending process. The SCOTUS can't change it and then call it case law and say it can't be challenged.

That's an argument that the courts have shot down time and again.

SCOTUS opines on the law, and you get to obey it.

Exactly. The unelected scotus says it has final say on every issue and no one can disagree with them!!!! The constitution gives them no such authority. They just grabbed it from the states.

That is neither true nor accurate.
SCOTUS may find a law to be unconstitutional. That does not stop the Congress or a State Legislature may pass similar law that does the same thing but leaves out the stuff SCOTUS ruled out.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

You want to change the constitution then go thru the amending process. The SCOTUS can't change it and then call it case law and say it can't be challenged.

That's an argument that the courts have shot down time and again.

SCOTUS opines on the law, and you get to obey it.

Exactly. The unelected scotus says it has final say on every issue and no one can disagree with them!!!! The constitution gives them no such authority. They just grabbed it from the states.

Is the Supreme Court obligated to uphold a law that is unconstitutional?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Learning what "federalism" and how it applies to the Constitution is personal: every citizen should understand.

No.."you must have a comprehension problem"....That's personal.
Now, do you want to lose a battle of insults or have a debate.
Your move.

You don't have a chance if you want to debate with me, so you go with insults.

You don't get it. You don't understand federalism, and you don't comprehend Article III.

Until you agree on common terms and definitions, you simply can argue only "but" "but" and so forth.

 

[g5000]

You want to change the constitution then go thru the amending process. The SCOTUS can't change it and then call it case law and say it can't be challenged.

That's an argument that the courts have shot down time and again.

SCOTUS opines on the law, and you get to obey it.

Exactly. The unelected scotus says it has final say on every issue and no one can disagree with them!!!! The constitution gives them no such authority. They just grabbed it from the states.

This is ignorant on so many levels.

It is obvious you have never read a single Supreme Court decision in your life, much less several.

 

[g5000]

This suit was brought to the Supreme Court by Native Americans. Injuns. So how funny is it the topic title says "Illegals win again"? BWA-HA-HA-HA!


Arizona attempted to overstep itself and dictate FEDERAL law for FEDERAL elections. All you dupes who are going on about "states rights" are going to have a difficult time explaining where the Constitution says a state can dictate federal election laws.

Read. The. Decision.

Most of you are opining in the dark. Bloviating from ignorance. Drinking the piss.

 

[g5000]

If a state passed a law which said you can only own guns on Sunday, I am pretty sure all the "states rights" and "tenth amendment" ignoramuses here would have no problem with the Supreme Court getting all activist-like and steamrolling right over such a law.

Funny how they can't seem to get that exact same principle is at play in this decision. A state violated the Constitution, period.

 

[007]

Honestly, what's to stop anyone on earth from voting now?

Nothing.

That's as it should be.

You should be able to vote over the web.

You really are one mother fucking stupid pile of shit.

NO, they SHOULDN'T be allowed to vote, EVER. Unless you are a LEGAL American citizen and can PROVE IT, you should NOT be voting. Even if they do give these illegal aliens amnesty, they should NEVER be allowed to vote. That right should be forever forfeited for coming to this country illegally.

But, you don't see it that way, because like the SHIT STAIN we have in the BLACK HOUSE, you HATE AMERICA and our LAWS.

Fuck off dip shit.

 

[g5000]

Read. The. Decision.

If that is too much, I quoted from it earlier. Read the quotes.

You guys are WAAAAAAAY off the mark.