DOJ drops opposition to Texas voter ID law

Published on Feb 27, 2017

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) on the Department of Justice reversing its position on the Texas voter ID law.

Fox News

AP
February 27, 2017

AUSTIN, Texas – The Trump administration plans to abandon the federal government’s longstanding opposition to a key portion of Texas’ toughest-in-the-nation voter ID law, a U.S. Justice Department spokesman said Monday.

It’s a dramatic break from the agency under President Barack Obama, which spent years arguing that the 2011 voter ID law that Texas’ Republican-controlled Legislature passed was intended to disenfranchise poor and minority voters.

Danielle Lang of the Washington-based Campaign Legal Center called the decision an “extraordinary disappointment.”

“It’s a complete 180,” said Lang, the center’s deputy director of voting rights. “We can’t make heads or tails of any factual reason for the change. There has been no new evidence that’s come to light.”

The law requires voters to show one of seven forms of state-approved photo identification — gun permits are acceptable but college IDs are not. Voting rights activists sued, and the case returns to court Tuesday in Corpus Christi, Texas, before U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos.

Justice Department spokesman Mark Abueg said the agency was preparing a brief detailing its rationale for the move. He said that although the Justice Department will no longer argue that the law was intended to discriminate against minorities, it doesn’t plan to withdraw from a portion of the lawsuit that argues that the law had the effect of discriminating against them.

A federal appeals court last year ruled on effect, deciding that the Texas law discriminated against minorities and the poor and ordering changes ahead of the November election.

The U.S. Supreme Court last month declined a Texas appeal that sought to restore the law, but Chief Justice John Roberts left the door open for another appeal at a later time.

Along with Texas, the Obama-led Justice Department launched a high-profile legal challenge against North Carolina’s voter ID law, arguing that its requirements were unnecessary and unconstitutional.

North Carolina’s top Democrats recently asked the U.S. Supreme Court to dismiss an effort to restore the law, which had been struck down as unconstitutional.

Republican-led legislatures around the country have in recent years rushed to pass restrictions on voting in an effort to prevent fraud at the ballot box, despite any evidence that it’s a widespread problem.

Under Obama, the Justice Department sought to contest such measures, but the Trump administration’s change in strategy could empower other conservative-controlled states to follow Texas’ lead and tighten their voter ID rules.

Trump has consistently touted unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud and has praised laws requiring ballot box photo identification.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions repeatedly sounded alarms over voting fraud and intimidation as a U.S. senator and challenged Justice Department attorneys over whether they were pursuing it aggressively enough. As a U.S. attorney in Alabama in the 1980s, he prosecuted three civil rights activists on charges of tampering with ballots.

The three defendants were acquitted in a matter of hours. And during his confirmation hearing last month, Sessions defended laws requiring voters to show picture identification at the polls: “I think voter ID laws, properly drafted, are OK.”

Wendy Weiser, director of the democracy program at the Brennan Center for Justice, said it was disappointing that the Justice Department would change its legal position.

“The more vigorously the Department of Justice pursues illegal discrimination when it happens, the more deterrent an effect it has,” she said.

“When they pull back from vigorous enforcement, it may have an unfortunate and pernicious effect of sending a green light to states that there’s going to be less policing” of discriminatory laws.

Source

–00–

These dingleberry tools are aggravating. They would rather spend seven years of taxpayer money and private funding determined to allow a barn door sized opening for illegal voting practices, than say everyone in every state would be better served and more comfortable knowing that voters are people from their districts who are breathing members with rights of citizenship.

Some of this could be easily solved with death certificate and jury validated residence data bases cross-referenced with voter rolls and adjustments noted but that is too simple and threatening for some of these vacuous excuses for idiots.

Welfare recipients can’t get assistance without valid ID.  Libraries for Pete sake require valid drivers license and residence proof. Don’t expect other than minimal healthcare assistance without identifiction either. Not one issue on this has ever been made that those places are illegally asking for identification when needed. There is hardly any place in the US that does not ask upon occasion for valid ID. As Rep. Louie Gohmert mentioned in the video even the DNC requires valid picture ID to get into the convention.

I won’t even waste my energy on asking why they are insistent on pushing this meme; because, we do know why already. It doesn’t take a Sherlock Holmes or Einstein to figure it out.

I have to admit though it is better than watching the Oscars meltdown or a comedy show when we see lefty idiots having mental breakdowns, shedding fake tears, and going off on public displays of tantrums when they are told “no.”

It’s getting tiresome to open up a media site though where nothing but their rants are displayed as gospel–which is probably their goal. At the same time the more they obfuscate, the more firmly we stand in solidarity and on constitutionally conservative solid ground.

The one caution I have for them is that they do need to understand there is only so far that their irrational behavior can be allowed to go before law-abiding citizens and enforcement agencies retaliate. Then they will reap in equal measure the consequences of their actions. This past election cycle was proof of that.

–Uriel–

About Uriel

Retired educator and constitutionalist
Tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to DOJ drops opposition to Texas voter ID law

  1. vonMesser says:

    Now to drop about 500 more of them frivolous federal lawsuits…….

  2. Federal and State laws demand everyone present a photo ID in order to purchase a pack of cigarettes… Need I say more?

  3. Popular Front says:

    ‘Campaign Legal Centre’. Hmm, no don’t tell me, let me guess. A seething hotbed of whiny leftists yes?

  4. Hardnox says:

    Voting standards are the responsibility of the States. Period. Check the Constitution. Any other discussion is irrelevant.

  5. Shar says:

    I had to show a birth certificate for my boys to play T Ball.

  6. SafeSpace says:

    “…rushed to pass restrictions on voting in an effort to prevent fraud at the ballot box, despite any evidence that it’s a widespread problem…” Yeah, right, AP. Maybe it’s not a widespread problem in the elitist enclaves where y’all live and vote, but out here in the rest of the country, voter fraud has been an issue since the Democrats lost to Reagan.

    • Uriel says:

      Truth to be told voter fraud has been an issue from the beginning lol newspapers back in the earliest years mention intimidation and such

  7. GunnyG says:

    No ID? No vote.

    • Uriel says:

      Exactly Gunny Even the elderly and disabled are required to haveforms of ID and it has been since 1901 that state ID for driving came into being in New York no less

  8. Shar says:

    Uriel,

    Not sure NYS at the YMCA summer camp. I was surprised to say the least.

  9. upaces88 says:

    Clinton had an entire staff that worked for months and months to find the names of Dead people who would be votting. AND, she still lost, thank God.

  10. Popular Front says:

    Even dirt-poor African democracies use indelible ink-marked thumbs to prevent voter fraud and we in the West scoff at this. Seems to work very well though.

Don't be bashful leave a comment and let us know what you think - Please note our Comment Policy (Please keep all comments on topic and relevant to the discussion. Thank You. )