(Reuters) - The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to review a legal
challenge to the Voting Rights Act, a landmark law adopted in 1965 to
protect African-American voters who had faced decades of
discrimination at the polls.
The court's decision comes just days after a presidential election in
which Latino and African-American voters played a big role in
re-electing Democratic President Barack Obama, reflecting a basic
shift in national demographics.
The high court accepted an appeal brought by Shelby County, Alabama,
challenging a core provision of the act that requires nine states and
several local governments with a history of bias to get federal
permission to change their election procedures.
Arguments in the case will likely be heard by the Supreme Court in
early 2013, with a decision expected by the end of June.
Some justices on the nine-member court, including Chief Justice John
Roberts, have signaled in earlier cases discomfort with policies that
draw distinctions based on race.
In a 2009 Voting Rights Act case, the Supreme Court avoided ruling on
the law's constitutionality. The court suggested that the federal
"preclearance" requirement may no longer be needed or constitutional.
Roberts, dissenting from a 2006 voting-rights decision, criticized
what he called "a sordid business, this divvying us up by race."
AlleyCat wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 16:59:50 -0800, In article
> <kl9r985834lvhfsur6715on2apjpeuu...@4ax.com>, trdell1234N...@gmail.com
> > The court's decision comes just days after a presidential election in
> > which Latino and African-American voters played a big role in
> > re-electing Democratic President Barack Obama, reflecting a basic
> > shift in national demographics.
> True... take any one of Obama's voting blocks away and he loses. BUT,
Slick Willard apparently only had one block - angry white males.
> the deciding factor in his win, and Romney's defeat, was none of the
> above... it was the stupid, guilt-stricken, gimme my free birth control
> and abortion on demand, white women that decided the election. Now that
So, those hateful rape utterances didn't have anything to do with anything?
> because the Obama idiots are, well, idiots. They think that free birth
> control and abortion on demand is more important than a balanced budget.
> Oh, I forgot... Obama can dance a jig on Ellen and sing like Al Green.
> His two best attributes. Can't understand why that doesn't equate into
> being a good President, though. Oh well... 4 more years and we'll get to
> say, "told you so."
> > > the deciding factor in his win, and Romney's defeat, was none of the
> > > above... it was the stupid, guilt-stricken, gimme my free birth control
> > > and abortion on demand, white women that decided the election. Now that
> > So, those hateful rape utterances didn't have anything to do with anything?
> Shit... most of the young voters didn't even know who was running for
> President... had to Google it. How the fuck you think they're going to
> hear about some obscure House member saying something he thought was
> correct from writings back in the day? Stupid is as stupid does... and
> stupid are the people that don't know shit about the country and how it
> works. Just because dumbasses are earning a million bucks, they're ready
> for change... LOL
> Idiots, and the most stupid?... the dumb ass white girls that don't know
> shit, but know Obama's black, and that's cool. Yeah, it's cool until one
> of these gets hold of them:
On Nov 9, 8:28 pm, AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:
> Take any one of Obama's voting blocks away and he loses. BUT, the
> deciding factor in his win, and Romney's defeat, was none of the
> above... it was the stupid, guilt-stricken, gimme my free birth control
> and abortion on demand, young single(because they are ugly, or just too
> wrapped up in themselves to give a shit about the country)white women
> that decided the election.
And you guys just don't see the connection between blatant sexism like
that, and losing an election.
AlleyCat wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 21:11:31 -0700, In article <509DD3F3.3173F4C7
> @hotmail.com>, traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com says...
> > AlleyCat wrote:
> > > On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 19:14:15 -0700, In article
> > > <509DB877.47304...@hotmail.com>, traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com says...
> > > > > True... take any one of Obama's voting blocks away and he loses.
> > > BUT,
> > > > Slick Willard apparently only had one block - angry white males.
> > > Wrong. You retards need to vent against more than your angry white
> > > males. Just because we are successful and you aren't? LOL
> > If wrong, then why didn't Willie win those groups?
> Typical winger. Why didn't Obama win the married white women block? See,
> I can ask stupid questions too. I said you were wrong about white males
> being his ONLY voting block.
Obama won the gender gap. DUH
> He didn't win the black vote, for obvious reasons... he ain't black, and
> blacks are raceass(racist black word), so they only vote for their own
> kind. Plus, they want their free shit to remain free and not have to
And yet, lots of whites voted for Obama too. DUH
> work for it. They don't understand, that the democrats are keeping them
> down on the Plantation by giving them their free shit. Cain't go
"their free this"? Like what? And for all of them? Whine some more for us.
> nowhere, do nothing, cuz they po, and not working but collecting that
> guv'ment chaik, is all they'll ever know. Little minds, stay in little
> neighborhoods where they chillren are sujekted too boolets from dem drug
> deelers.
> He didn't win the Hispanic vote, because Obama's letting them into the
> country illegally AND giving them free shit too.
Prove it.
> He didn't win the gay vote, because of his principles... like MOST
> Americans, homosexuality is an aberration. After 200,000 years of
> breeding, humans have started to "lose" some of what keeps humans
> alive... the ability to procreate and survive. Nature has started to
> devolve. Homosexuality is not what nature had intended for the human
> race. Don't give me that hate bullshit.
Are all CONservatives as ignorant as you?
> > > Romney had all the same blocks Obama did, just not in the same numbers,
> > HAHAHH - "just not in the same numbers" as in SMALLER.
> Uh, here's YOUR Phlip duh moment... duh.
> > Noted - complete dodge about the rape fiascos...
> What the fuck are you talking about? Rape fiasco(s)? I can't dodge what
Idiot. Not keeping up with the news? Legitimate rape? HELLO?
> some dopehead (you) can't put into words. Are you talking about Akin? If
> you think what that old codger said, turned stupid, guilt-stricken,
> white women against Romney, then what does that say about the stupid,
> guilt-stricken, white women? That their stupid! Letting that change
> their minds about Romney and voting against him, shows just how stupid
> they really are. They want their abortion on demand and free birth
> control, instead of a more solvent America. Stupid is, as stupid does...
> and boy does they!
Do you have anything fact based on which to base your ranting and crying?
No?
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/nov/10/nation/la-na-election-20121111 ...
Nationally, according to exit polls, Latinos gave Obama 70% of their votes, Asian Americans 73% and blacks more than 90%. Voters younger than 30 went for Obama, 60% to 37%, and unmarried women sided with him by more than 2 to 1. Each of those groups made up a larger share of the electorate in 2012 than in 2008, except for blacks, who were steady.
...
