SOC205 - WEEK 5 - DISCUSSION 2

SOCIETY, LAW AND GOVERNMENT

"Supporting the Constitution or Playing the Political Game"

From the second e-Activity, discuss whether or not you believe Attorney General Eric Holder should have challenged the voting laws in the state of Texas enacted after the Supreme Court struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act. Analyze at least two (2) key issues related to Texas’s new voting laws that the Attorney General highlighted. Provide examples of rights covered by the Voting Rights Act to support your rationale.

No, I do not believe that Attorney General Eric Holder should have challenged the voting laws in the State of Texas. What I feel is the matter of restriction of any race in voting is parallel to weakness of thought, action and moral culpability.

Any race that is attributed to the constitution for protection is deserving of a voice to prevent acts that circumvent, hinder rights, liberty and freedom. Any action outside of this, I view as weak and trepidatious and a non-facilitator of my faith in the designated leaders to make laws, legalities that do not represent the entire populace fairly and would ultimately cause a desegregation and migratory pattern easier and then the step of apartheid accomplished.

Without a voice or vote man is nothing. If a Black man or African man or woman or any minority is nothing so is his ability to be considered American or his ability of fellowship or care in this country.

Apartheid in this united but segmented country is definitely not an act of true to the founders of this nation nor is it beneficial as an overall conglomerate. Overall, it is paramount to destruction and willful use of power to serve someone else’s agenda and not the entire populace that all collective states represent.

Consequently, because of this concern for minorities and Blacks are already considered as null and void with this future voting practice since they have no rights at all. At all. So, who has a dream now? (Resulting status, no amiability between the states and remission back to Civil War Era and circumvention of Democracy.)

Two key issues related to Texas’s new voting laws that Attorney General Holder highlighted pertains to evidence that was submitted to court which reflects that Texas Legislature deliberately discriminated against Hispanics with the redrawing of district lines which was enough to reimpose on the state the “preclearance safeguard” which is the allowance to notify and receive clearance of any and all changes to voting mechanism to prevent discriminatory practices.

The retainership of the Voting Rights Act was a long fought battle for minority voting and was summarily drafted by President Lyndon B, Johnson to prevent the overtaking and keeping the precedence of fair play and distributed unifying of thought and principle of justice and right to act and protect and retain a vote (voice) in America.

Attorney General Holder also urged Congress to reimpose more general preclearance requirements and that is with its inclusivity of the right at which federal courts could subject discriminatory non-covered jurisdiction to remedies contained in the special divisions. Therefore, any contentious jurisdiction would have the right to challenge and question the validity of any actions that are unfavorable and reflect discrimination.

The question of the validity of the poll is not in fact the act but the inability and subtle manipulation and act of intimidation is the facilitator and act against those considered contemptuous is thinly disguised by this voter id. Therefore, the disenfranchised minority is seen as mute anyway and why not at the polls as well because the perception is they are not cognizant. Students, seniors, Hispanics and Blacks are intelligent enough to understand and why are the student ids not allowable…are the students mute, stupid and useless too in America. Further being of any race should be enough to guarantee the right to choose, acknowledge that they are people and human and entitled to the guaranteed freedom this country claims as right.

The Voting Rights Act was written and compiled to defuse the acts of resistance of allowing Black people or African Americans the right to vote. Due to overall distress and unrest throughout the country President Johnson put in act this conciliatory measure and soothing of all in the nation to allow Blacks free access to vote.

As such the rights established continue to stand fast against acts of discrimination because of its stance or stand on the Fifteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Any act against the Fifteenth constitute to myself an act of treason against this nation and all therein. All are either with this country and act as one or against the unified joining of states that makes the United States. Further since the Act stands for a protected sect as thus it is interwoven as each thread in the United States Flag.

If Section 5 is removed as a challenge so does the effectiveness of the Voting Act become void and useless. Further it silences the vote and voice to all in these “so-called egregious voting districts” that are probably filled with people who are not cognizant or thought to be and silenced anyway.

Describe at least three (3) effects that the proposed regulation of voting laws in Texas could have on the next presidential election. Justify your response.

Three effects that the proposed regulation of voting laws can have on Texas consist of a clear shot for Republican domination at the polls, simultaneously affect other Republican states to move in similar manner and continue as a Republican state onward.

Thank you.

Felicia

http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/07/preclearance-sought-for-texas-on-voting/

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/01/29/new-state-voting-laws-face-first-presidential-election-test/79534420/

http://www.votetexas.gov/register-to-vote/need-id/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/justice-department-sues-texas-over-voter-id-law/2013/08/22/ac654a68-0b4b-11e3-9941-6711ed662e71_story.html?utm_term=.d4c18e64ff20

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/26/us/holder-wants-texas-to-clear-voting-changes-with-the-us.html

https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/election-2016-restrictive-voting-laws-numbers

SOCIETY, LAW AND GOVERNMENT
WEEK 5 - DISCUSSION 2
RESPONSE TO CO-STUDENT

Response to First Opinion

In response to your post, Attorney General Eric Holder did not challenge the voting laws nor the Voting Rights Act (1965). .What he did was challenge the re-jurisdiction of lines in Texas and the possible exclusionary of large segments of the minority populace from being able to vote. This action in itself was an act that discriminated and made the impossibility of voting privileges disallowed because these actions silenced them effectively as putting a muzzle on.

The Voting Rights Act (1965) pulls on the Constitution of the United States as its back, support and power to weld authority and position and governance over all courts in this country. Further this law is like the blood in this country and gives all free right to vote as is the guarantee of freedom. The act is not unconstitutional but the deliberate discard of votes is. These segmented sections are referred to as egregious sections and as such they are viewed as heavily discriminated sections in Texas.

I agree the outpouring of funds that are desperately needed to survive is also a hindrance and deliberate ploy to stall and prevent the right and act of voting due to heavy impoverishment in these sectors.

Lastly, I agree all Americans deserve the right to vote to reflect their choice of their representative and authoritarian voice in this land of America.

Response to Second Opinion

I disagree with absolute finality, this regulation is biased and reflects acts of bigotry, hate and suppression and oppression acting as a dual sword. There is no way that any minority will be seen as a human thinking caring evolved person with the right to express their objections being crushed and all exposed to mass discrimination.

Frightened and intimidated is the huge segment of minorities by this violation of the Constitution and protective levels of the enacted Voting Rights Act of 1965 which was compiled to protect and allow free right to vote as man and woman at these polls. The acts of free thought and actions have to be maintained and prevailed upon to be considered a free upstanding American Citizen.

Thank you.

Felicia