- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Supreme Court lets Ohio limit early voting
Posted on 9/29/14 at 7:14 pm
Posted on 9/29/14 at 7:14 pm
quote:
Acting on a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court issued an order Monday afternoon that allows Ohio officials to cut early voting in the state by a week.
In a one-page order (posted here), the court's five Republican-appointed justices agreed to lift a District Court judge's ruling that had blocked the state from carrying out legislation that cut early voting days from 35 to 28.
The four Democratic-appointed justices dissented, but none of the justices explained their positions.
Ohio officials welcomed the order, while those who had challenged the cutback in early voting time expressed disappointment.
"We are gratified the United States Supreme Court has allowed Ohio’s early voting law to stand," Secretary of State Jon Husted said in a statement.
“I plan to implement state law and the voting schedule established by Democrats and Republicans at the local level, meaning Ohioans will have 28 days of early voting, including two Saturdays and a Sunday. Ohioans can have confidence that it remains easy to vote and hard to cheat in our state," the Republican official said.
"We are disappointed that by a bare majority, the Supreme Court reinstated controversial voting changes that could make it harder for tens of thousands of Ohioans to vote," said Wendy Weiser of the Brennan Center for Justice. "Courts should serve as a bulwark against rollbacks to voting rights and prevent politicians from disenfranchising voters for political reasons."
Earlier this month, U.S. District Court Judge Peter Economus blocked the cut in early voting days, saying it was likely to have a disproportionate impact on African-American voters. Economus, a Clinton appointee, sits in Columbus.
LINK
Why do we need 35 days of early voting? Jesus Christ. The obsession people have with getting voting percentages so high is perplexing. If you actually are educated and motivated to vote, you don't need a fricking month to do it.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 7:18 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:I do not know. This is insane. There is no legitimate reason a person cannot find a way to vote at one point in 4 weeks.
Why do we need 35 days of early voting? Jesus Christ. The obsession people have with getting voting percentages so high is perplexing. If you actually are educated and motivated to vote, you don't need a fricking month to do it.
How is 35 weeks sufficient? Why not 42?
So very stupid.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 7:38 pm to Scruffy
I agree. 28 days of early voting with a few weekend days included is plenty. There is no reason, short of being in the ICU, that you can't make it at some point over the course of a month.
What I understand even less is how having "only" 28 days, even if you think it's a bad policy, can possibly be unconstitutional.
What I understand even less is how having "only" 28 days, even if you think it's a bad policy, can possibly be unconstitutional.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 7:41 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:We don't. Considering how much can change in 35 days, I'm actually not sure how a vote that early can even be justified.
Why do we need 35 days of early voting?
Posted on 9/29/14 at 7:44 pm to NC_Tigah
Of course, democrats are claiming that this ruling is politically motivating because increased turnout means better results for democrats. However, why is it NOT politically motivated when dems try to pass laws that extend voting days?
Posted on 9/29/14 at 7:54 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Even 28 days is still a lot to me. It should be 21 days and I think that's a fair amount of time for early voting.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 7:56 pm to Sentrius
Democrats are revealing their subtle bigotry against blacks by saying that this ruling limits voting rights for minorities. You have to be a piece of shite to think that blacks are so incompetent that they need extra days to vote.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 8:04 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
It is a terribly thing to want more participation in voting.
As if people forgot why those hours were extended.
As if people forgot why those hours were extended.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 8:09 pm to BuckyBadger
quote:Neaux.
It is a terribly thing to want more participation in voting.
'It is a terribly thing to want' voting so far in advance as to invalidate the result.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 8:10 pm to BuckyBadger
quote:
It is a terribly thing to want more participation in voting.
this is such a bullshite and tired argument
i want more responsible voting. extending the voting period to more than 1 month is absurd
can you tell me why 28 days is not enough and why 35 days is required? why not 42?
to you, is there ever going to be a justification for decreasing the voting period? or will expansion alone be justified? if so, what is the magic number?
Posted on 9/29/14 at 8:11 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Well...you get bussed into whichever state, turn in your former state's ID, obtain a new state ID in the state you're going to vote in, register as a voter when you apply for the ID, wait for new picture ID to arrive in the mail, go vote. After you vote, simply return to your home state and repeat the process. Voila!!!
Posted on 9/29/14 at 8:11 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Democrats are revealing their subtle bigotry against blacks by saying that this ruling limits voting rights for minorities. You have to be a piece of shite to think that blacks are so incompetent that they need extra days to vote.
Democrats think black people need help to wipe their own asses. There is nothing more racist than voting democrat.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 8:14 pm to Sentrius
quote:
It should be 21 days and I think that's a fair amount of time for early voting.
I think it should be 10 days. Too much can change in the last month before an election regarding a candidate. If you can't find time in 10 days, including 2 days on a weekend, to vote then you don't care enough to vote.
Extended early voting doesn't hardly increase turnout, I'd say 98-99 percent of people who will vote would still vote if it was decreased to 10 days. The extended period just gives time to enact more voter fraud and imo it's complete bullshite.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 8:15 pm to BuckyBadger
quote:
It is a terribly thing to want more participation in voting.
I agree. Too many idiots are casting votes as is.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 8:21 pm to BuckyBadger
quote:Why don't we extend it to 42 days? 49? 365?
It is a terribly thing to want more participation in voting. As if people forgot why those hours were extended.
There is no rational explanation behind the early voting being that long. It should be a week tops with the opportunity to request mail in ballots.
This post was edited on 9/29/14 at 8:22 pm
Posted on 9/29/14 at 8:25 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Why do you need to shorten it?
. this is such a bull shite and tired argument i want more responsible voting. extending the voting period to more than 1 month is absurd can you tell me why 28 days is not enough and why 35 days is required? why not 42? to you, is there ever going to be a justification for decreasing the voting period? or will expansion alone be justified? if so, what is the magic number?
The rest is just a tired strawman.
Be honest. It is done to limit voting. It is done because it affects certain groups of people.
Would you like to explain your solutions for the fiasco of 04?
Posted on 9/29/14 at 8:26 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:Your evidence of this is?
'It is a terribly thing to want' voting so far in advance as to invalidate the result.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 8:28 pm to BuckyBadger
quote:
Why do you need to shorten it?
it's absurd as it is. far too much can happen in that time span to change a mind. also, it encourages irresponsibility
quote:
The rest is just a tired strawman.
no it's not. if you believe it should be longer, then why not an even longer period? same argument you're making applies
quote:
Would you like to explain your solutions for the fiasco of 04?
which fiasco?
Posted on 9/29/14 at 8:31 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Exactly. Why only 35 days? Why not longer?
no it's not. if you believe it should be longer, then why not an even longer period? same argument you're making applies
I'm sure even less people will be disenfranchised if it were even longer.
Like I said, it should be 1 week. No more, no less.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 8:35 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Should have been a simple SC vote. States get to set early voting guidelines and Ohio wanted to Chang there's. To rule x days was needed then the judicial branch becomes the legislative branch. Also effecting every other state in the process
I am less concerned of the ruling then the actual vote on the ruling. Should have been 9-0
I am less concerned of the ruling then the actual vote on the ruling. Should have been 9-0
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News