DOJ Rejects S.C. Voter ID Law — Again
On Friday U.S. Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez responded to South Carolina's request it reconsider an objection to the state's Voter ID law
It looks like South Carolina's Voter ID law will get a day in court after Assistant U.S. Attoney General Thomas Perez again shot down the law under the voting rights act on Friday.
In a letter dated June 29, Perez responded to South Carolina's request that the Justice Department reconsider its objection to the law based on the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Perez maintained that expert opinion on the law as passed makes a persuasive case that minority groups will be disproportionately affected by the new law, which runs affowl of the Voting Rights Act.
"We have reconsidered our earlier determination in this matter based on the information and arguments you have advanced in support of your request, along with the other information in our files and comments received from other interested persons. In this instance, the information obtained from state officials was drawn from the deposition testimony and other evidence in State of South Carolina v. United States, 1:12-cv-00203 (D.D.C.), the pending declaratory judgment action seeking judicial preclearance for these changes under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
"Several of the experts reports produced in the case helped inform our analysis. Dr. Charles Stewart's analysis of Act R54's effect on the ability of minority voters to participate effectively in the political process was particularly persuasive in showing that Act R54 will have a discriminatory effect under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. In addition, we found the expert reports by Dr. Ted Arrington and Dr. Orville Burton to be particularly persuasive in showing that Act R54 was enacted with a discriminatory purpose. In light of these considerations, I remain unable to conclude that the State of South Carolina has carried its burden of showing that the submitted change in Section 5 of Act R54 neither has a discriminatory purpose nor will have a discriminatory effect. Georgia v. United States, supra; 28 C.F.R. 51.52. Therefore, on behalf of the Attorney General, I must decline to withdraw the December 23, 2011 objection to Section 5 of Act R54."
Following the DOJ objection to the law last December, S.C. Attorney General Alan Wilson vowed to file suit over it. That lawsuit was filed on Feb. 7.
"The DOJ has refused to allow South Carolina to enact its Voter I.D. law, claiming it does not adequately protect voters from discrimination, per the 1965 Voting Rights Act," Wilson said in a release at the time. "However, very similar laws have been upheld by the United States Supreme Court (in the case of Indiana), and even pre-cleared by the DOJ itself (in the case of Georgia)."
Wilson also requested the DOJ reconsider its objection, which led to Perez' latest letter.
A three judge panel will hear the case later this month in federal court.
Wilson and S.C. Gov. Nikki Haley were not immediately available for comment.
Richard Hayes
4:17 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
Excellent - fairness prevails! I understand that proponents of strict photo ID rules argue that they are needed to protect the integrity of elections and prevent voter fraud. But these arguments do a disservice to the American people by confusing unrelated issues; voter impersonation fraud is virtually nonexistent, and the examples of fraud that proponents can point to are not situations that could be prevented by photo ID requirements. Instead, strict ID rules create new obstacles for the millions of Americans who do not have acceptable ID; obstacles that fall hardest on elderly, low-income, and minority voters. We want to make sure as many voters that can LEGALLY vote have that opportunity. Let's spend time ona REAL issue -- improving our Public Schools that have languished in the bottom of all states for the past 10 years of Republican leadership, or lack thereof....
Greg Adams
8:48 pm on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Richard I am sick of your false memes. It is relatively difficult to prove a negative, so keep on with your lies. Fairness will prevail when illegals are prevented from voting in American elections. Keep paying them to show up, keep bussing them in, keep tearing down our borders Soros funkie.
reg
12:16 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
actually, greggy-poo, all the points he made in there are very well-documented. Now, where's your evidence of illegals voting in US elections? You're obviously a troll - and pretty bad at it, too.
JoSCh
12:54 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
That's an insult to trolls, reg. Trolls have a talent,post well, and they don't want to appear stupid which Greg clearly is. Greg is a partisan, a party cheerleader, a liar, a lackey and a false patriot, but he's no troll.
That or he's a really GREAT troll that made me think that he wasn't!
reg
1:47 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
you left out "communist sympathizer", too - that's the sentiment he continues to promote here on his many patch comments
Ken
4:27 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
The republicans don't want the poor and minorities to vote, doing so lessens their chances to get elected.
robert bailey
4:55 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
Dumocrats continue to want to commit voter fraud to steal elections from the will of the majority of the people. Voter fraud without a picture ID requirement would be very hard to prove, which is why it is so very important to the integrity of the election process that all voters be identified. The way the SC law is written there is no undo burden on the elderly, low income or minority voters. People without picture id's are very rare and the id law will make sure voters that are LEGALLY able to vote can vote.
penny
8:08 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
You are aware, are you not, that the State of S.C. has been under GOPer control for 30+ years? Queen Nimrata and "you lie" Jr., are terrified there will be a revolt due to their draconian policies.
It's an attempt to suppress the votes of minorities and the poor.
Simple as that.
You know it. I know it. Most of S.C. knows it.
reg
8:11 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
Can you give us example of any case in which voter fraud occurred here in our state? ...we're waiting....and will have to continue to wait because *it never happened.* This effects senior citizens most - once you turn 65, you don't have to renew a state ID unless you're driving. Banks legally have to take your expired ID; so do court rooms. But now the GOP wants to take away their right to vote?
James Brown
12:14 pm on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Hey, idiot, if they were NOT worried about "the will of the people", why so many restrictions??
stanley seigler
5:33 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
@robert bailey
GOPs have sold their souls to the koch bros (ruthless capitalism)...there is NO voter fraud that voterID laws address...
people cant be that stupid to believe there is...
anyone who believes there is... pls cite examples...bet there will be no citations...just more GOP hyperbole...
penny
8:09 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
Amen to that!
Greg Adams
8:44 pm on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Stanley, you must like to spread lies. The Koch Brothers contribute 1/100th of what the left contributes. Keep spreading that false meme.
JoSCh
8:35 am on Wednesday, July 4, 2012
Greg Adams; proof that even a broken clock is sometimes right. LOL, yes, the Koch brothers probably ARE 1% of GOP funding.
Also, you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. <- that is a meme, tardbilly.
stanley seigler
3:07 pm on Wednesday, July 4, 2012
@Greg Adams: "...The Koch Brothers contribute 1/100th of what the left contributes..."
doubtful of your "facts"...but willing to apologize profusely for spreading lies if you have specifics...ie; to what contributions do you refer...
in my statements...kock bros replace al capp's gen bullmoose as the epitome of "ruthless capitalism" but;
more than willing to discuss specifics of kock bros contributions...however, you cant (well shouldnt) compare kock contributions to total contributions to DEM causes.
a possible appropriate discussion is to compare kock to soros...
[CLIP] "When it comes to the combination of institutional lobbying, 527 group donations and PAC expenditures, Koch Industries far out-spends Soros’ hedge fund and think tank, $57.4 million to $12.8 million. Most of this money is attributable to lobbying"
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/09/opensecrets-battle---koch-brothers.html...
getting back to voterID laws (the topic)...asked not answered:
"anyone who believes there is [voter fraud at the ballot box]... pls cite examples...bet there will be no citations...just more GOP hyperbole
Carolyn LeBeauf
7:40 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
Their efforts will fail jus like Haley is a failure.
penny
8:09 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
She is truly a disaster, is she not.
Tonto
9:05 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3hY1eagq88&feature=g-vrec
reg
9:42 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
this is absolutely the most hypocritical thing you've ever posted here, Toto - you're showing a video of the guy who octupled our debt when he was president, and who to this day hold the record for it in a single term.
Tonto
11:29 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYrPWwJkhdc&feature=g-vrec
stanley seigler
12:11 am on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
re: ...'you're showing a video of the guy who octupled our debt when he was president, and who to this day hold the record for it in a single term.' [reg]
posted on another patch thread...but maybe appropriate here.
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/ronald-reagan-was-no-libertarian
[CLIPs]
"Eight dreary, miserable years" of "egregiously statist policies," Murray Rothbard snarled in Liberty magazine in 1989. My colleague David Boaz was less dyspeptic, but nearly as disappointed, in his introduction to the 1988 Cato Institute volume "Assessing the Reagan Years": "The Reagan Revolution turned out to be a paper tiger,"...
The Cato Institute [no bleedining heart liberal rag] did just that in "Assessing the Reagan Years," which showed that under Reagan, federal spending actually increased from 23 percent to 24 percent of gross national product, while payroll tax increases resulted in a net tax increase for most Americans.
Tonto
12:20 am on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/02/Poll-HealthCare-Rasumussen-ObamaCare
reg
1:47 am on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
As one who conducts professional polls and surveys for a living, Toto, I'd recommend you look at the source you're citing - the only media that cite rasmussen are Fox and World Net Daily (who Mr. Rasmussen once worked for). The regular media don't accept his reports because they are obviously slanted, unscientific and unreliable. Now, go on back to kansas, toto, and find us an actual reliable source
OldFlatulence
12:42 am on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Congrats to the Patch for making the Huffy Post! Finally found this as a minor story in the Establishment Rag - at least it was in front of the pay wall....
penny
8:01 am on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
HP has no pay wall.
stanley seigler
1:03 am on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
tonto's ref say:
'Rasmussen Reports did extensive polling this weekend -- the weekend after the Supreme Court ruled to uphold Obama Care -- and found that 52% of Americans still want it repealed.'
another poll say:
'... by the Kaiser Family Foundation, found that 56 percent agreed that opponents should “stop their efforts to block the law and move on to other national problems,” while just 38 percent said foes should “continue trying to block the law from being implemented.”
http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2012/07/02/americans-mood-on-health-care-move-on-poll/
polls, polls, polls...the only one that counts will be in nov 2012, when BO WINS by a landslide...
reg
1:54 am on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
What's really strange is that, if you ask poll respondents if they agree that everyone should have insurance, and that everyone should have affordable insurance, and that everyone should have that insurance without pre-existing condition limitations, and that parents should be able to keep children for extended periods into early adulthood, and that insurance should cost less, and that insurance companies should provide rebates to consumers if their premiums don't meet a minimum in limited expenses - *an outstanding majority of Americans agree.* It's only when the term "obamacare" is applied that folks start objecting - and that's due to the polygamist/communist intentions of the current, so-called republican party of late. Give it up, Toto- or get the hell out of our country. Based on the video links you've been posting, it seems you'd be more comfortable in China or NOrth Korea, since those are the countries using the same platforms you promote here.
Tonto
9:37 am on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7equ_xy5_kg
JoSCh
10:32 am on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
lol. You're the best Tonto.
stanley seigler
2:52 pm on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
@JoSch: "You're the best Tonto."
what would we do without the research...but there is more BO damning research...
[clip] bill ayers actually begat BO in the congo...and bill ayers is a direct descendant of lucifer...
[clip] "...proof the earth is 4500 years old and scientist are still looking for scientific proof it's not flat...etc, etc, etc..." [brightbart.com]
surely tonto puts bleeding hearts on...is busting our whatever...he doesn't believe this...do you, tonto?
apologies for wasting people's time with my dribble...the devil made me do it...
Tonto
9:20 pm on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnAcbxZSEzw&feature=fvsr
Tonto
9:50 pm on Tuesday, July 3, 2012
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/03/North-Carolina-Democrat-Will-Vote-To-Repeal-Obamacare-Will-Not-Endorse-Obama
reg
6:47 am on Wednesday, July 4, 2012
Keep posting from those reich-wing sources, Toto -
Tonto
11:07 am on Wednesday, July 4, 2012
OK reg, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGmZ0fhH5fM&feature=related
JoSCh
11:48 am on Wednesday, July 4, 2012
http://youtu.be/HnsvDsJZSro
reg
5:01 pm on Wednesday, July 4, 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW0JTcYeKXg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgelM-lkzhA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=how3Khu18Zo&feature=related
FreeChoice
8:13 am on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Why is it that leftists have so little regard for their base? Do you actually believe that the poor and minorities don't have government issued IDs? You really do practice the soft bigotry of low expectations.
JoSCh
10:06 am on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Why is anyone who isn't a racist bigot a leftist now? I just want all Americans to be able to exercise their right to vote, poor, old, whatever. Having a government ID isn't a requirement of Americans. Why are you so adamant that we show our papers, mein comrade?
stanley seigler
9:57 am on Thursday, July 5, 2012
@FreeChoice: "...Do you [leftists] actually believe that the poor and minorities don't have government issued IDs?”
'Studies show that as many as 11 percent of eligible voters do not have government-issued photo ID.' http://www.brennancenter.org/content/section/category/voter_id/
do GOP sheep 'actually believe' the purpose of their shepherd's (kock bros, etal) voterID laws are NOT to suppress BO-voters... (wantta buy a lake-front in death valley)
do GOP sheep 'actually believe' there is voter fraud at the ballot box...please cite examples... (gotta bridge for sale)
Right Here
1:41 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
Can someone please explain to me, with out meaningless rhetoric, why I need an id to: cash a check, board a plane, use a credit card, drive a car, but I don't need one to vote?
JoSCh
1:56 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
The 24th amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html
reg
2:08 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
You need an id to cash a check because the private institutions of banks require it. You need one to board a plane because the private institutions of airlines require it. You need an id to use a credit card because the private institutions of businesses require it. *And in not one of those cases is a requirement that your id be a state-issued photo id, either.* You need a license to drive a car to ensure that you can operate it safely. And you *do* need some type of ID to vote - but it does NOT have to be state-issued id. That's the defining point. After the state first passed the law (and before it got tossed), the state began making it as difficult as hell to get a state-issued ID, too. It was rejecting women using their married names because they were different than the maiden names on their birth certificates. it was demanding records from people who already had state IDs, too, refusing to renew them for many - especially seniors, and because they didn't have state-issued birth certificates, just county-issued. Of course, years ago, that's how birth certificates were issued, but....try telling to the state DMV, which is only trying to help the commie GOP in SC by preventing people from getting their IDs.
Right Here
2:09 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
re: JoSCh
Guess you forget this part, just a petty detail:
Section 2.
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
JoSCh
2:14 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
I didn't forget it. What legislation are you referring to? The US Congress isn't attempting to pass legislation, are they?
Right Here
2:17 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
"You need an id to cash a check because the private institutions of banks require it."
Wrong. Federal law requires it (money laundering, anti-terror legislation instituted after 9/11.
"You need one to board a plane because the private institutions of airlines require it."
Wrong again. Guess you haven't flown since 9/11. Try telling TSA you don't need a gov't issued photo id to board a plane. LOL.
JoSCh
2:36 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
TSA isn't checking id's going onto a plane, the airline reps are.
The Patriot Act requires an ID to open an account or wire transfer, but not to cash checks.
You should change your name to Wrong Here.
Right Here
3:28 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
Dude, let's go down to Greenville-Spartenburg airport. I'll put up $5000 against your $500 that you will not board a plane/jet whatever without showing a gov't issued photo id to TSA (at least once, most likely several times). If you believe otherwise your delusional and I'm done.
JoSCh
3:39 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
So when the responses delivered are precise you're done, got it. The TSA checks before you enter the terminal at MOST airports, but there are many municipal airports where you don't have to show id to get on the tarmac. Lets go to the Mt Pleasant muni airport and you can buy me a drink. It won't be $5k, but you will be stunned at how much it costs.
Enjoy your weekend. You can thank the unions (and the Jews not incidentially) for it btw. Maseltov!