Federal judge puts Florida on 10-year probation after ruling voting law disenfranchises Black voters

[pecksniff]

Story.

A federal judge on Thursday ruled that parts of Florida's new voting restrictions unconstitutionally disenfranchised Black voters and banned the state from making certain voting changes without approval from the court for the next decade.
U.S. District Judge Mark Walker ruled that portions of the law restricting the use of ballot drop-boxes, assistance for voters, and third-party voter registration drives violated the Voting Rights Act and constitutional protections because they were passed "with the intent to discriminate against Black voters."

Walker also ruled that the state must get court approval for the next 10 years before it enacts any other changes related to these rules. The ruling effectively put Florida back under pre-clearance requirements that were imposed on states with a history of discrimination under the Voting Rights Act before the Supreme Court in 2013 struck down the preclearance rules in its Shelby County v. Holder decision.

Walker in a 288-page ruling wrote that the requirement was necessary because Florida has "repeatedly, recently, and persistently acted to deny Black Floridians access to the franchise."

Florida was one of the numerous Republican-led states that passed new voting restrictions amid former President Donald Trump's campaign to stoke lies about the election, which were often aimed at areas of states he lost that had large Black populations. Walker in his ruling wrote that racism was a "motivating factor" behind Florida's new voting law, SB 90.

Good to know the Voting Rights Act is not entirely a dead letter.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

What?!?! DeSantis did something illegal?!?! I’m shocked.

 

[pecksniff]

What?!?! DeSantis did something illegal?!?! I’m shocked.

Actually, it was our motherfucking Pub-controlled legislature.

 

[pecksniff]

It's frustrating being a Democrat in a "purple" state like Florida -- you always know the voting is so close that the next election might easily be the one to swing things your party's way -- but then it never does.

 

[Chobham]

How long you figure that's going to last?

 

[pecksniff]

How long you figure that's going to last?

Ten years.

 

[Rightguide]

Story.


Good to know the Voting Rights Act is not entirely a dead letter.

I suspect an immediate appeal.

 

[Chobham]

I suspect an immediate appeal.

Absolutely. I fully expect a permanent injunction.

 

[Rightguide]

Times are hard for Democrats:​

​

After setbacks, House Republicans finishing strong on redistricting​

by Ryan King, Breaking News Reporter
| April 02, 2022 05:00 AM

Republicans have been making a roaring fourth-quarter comeback in the redistricting process, eking out some last-minute victories that could offset some of the gains Democrats procured earlier in the year.

Legal triumphs in Ohio, Maryland, and New York during recent days have put the Democrats on their back feet and prompted the Cook Political Report to lower its estimate for Democrats’ net favorable seat gain to 1-2, down from the 4-5 estimate the group released weeks prior.

“I think that Democrats spent a lot of time crowing — they were spiking the football at the end of the third quarter. We knew then, like I'm saying now, that we were exactly where we thought we were going to be at this at that point,” Adam Kincaid, the president and executive director of the National Republican Redistricting Trust told the Washington Examiner.

Each seat is crucial to both parties in redistricting, the decennial line-drawing process after the nationwide census. House Republicans need to net five seats in the 435-member chamber to reclaim the majority the party lost in 2018.

Republicans inherited victories from the last round of redistricting in 2011, and they began this cycle defending a favorable baseline as a result. Adding to their good fortunes, the most recent census took seats away from blue states such as California and New York and increased seats in red states such as Texas and Florida. But Democrats quickly began outmaneuvering Republicans in court, raking in key victories in North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and more.

More here:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...republicans-finishing-strong-on-redistricting

 

[butters]

Ten years.

i expect it to be taken to a higher court for over-ruling, where some is likely to be upheld, some parts rejected. much as i believe the 10 years is a good thing, that's most likely to take a hit and be reduced to.. i dunno, maybe every 3 or 4?

 

[WillJ8787]

Story.


Good to know the Voting Rights Act is not entirely a dead letter.

....and good to know that when racists and folks who want to disenfranchise voters(all voters) in any State will be stopped at the Federal level and be treated like the morons that they are....by taking the decision making and implementing power out of their hands.

 

[LittleDixie]

Yeah, because black people just can't figure out how to vote without the help of white people.

We white people are just so virtuous for helping all of these poor black people who are just incapable of putting their vote in an envelope and mailing it before the deadline or driving to a polling station to vote.

 

[Chobham]

Yeah, because black people just can't figure out how to vote without the help of white people.

We white people are just so virtuous for helping all of these poor black people who are just incapable of putting their vote in an envelope and mailing it before the deadline or driving to a polling station to vote.

It's how you keep'em on the plantation.

 

[ll74]

Yeah, because black people just can't figure out how to vote without the help of white people.

We white people are just so virtuous for helping all of these poor black people who are just incapable of putting their vote in an envelope and mailing it before the deadline or driving to a polling station to vote.

Maybe read the judgement to determine what the judge actually thinks.

(Hint: he doesn't think blacks are stupid)

 

[Chobham]

I did, he still bought every possible excuse. Don't count on this standing.

 

[ll74]

I did, he still bought every possible excuse. Don't count on this standing.

Feel free to show me where he said black people need white people as LD described because they can't figure it out.

 

[LittleDixie]

Feel free to show me where he said black people need white people as LD described because they can't figure it out.

I'm just not going to read a 288 page judgment written in legaleese. I'm sorry.

But, I did read that the judge couched this in terms of the right to vote, and preventing people from voting. To my knowledge, these laws do not prevent anyone from voting. They may change or reduce locations, but no one is being prevented from voting.

So, I'll ask, if all of these regulations were put into place, would anyone be prohibited from voting?

 

[YDB95]

Feel free to show me where he said black people need white people as LD described because they can't figure it out.

That's a favorite trope for right wingers to convince themselves that Democrats are the real racists.

 

[LittleDixie]

That's a favorite trope for right wingers to convince themselves that Democrats are the real racists.

The Left treats black people like children who need their help. That's racist.

 

[Champakian]

How long you figure that's going to last?

The Appeals Court will most likely slap this down.
Who else is in the spotlight being frequently overturned?



We don't want judges to make law, no matter how badly they want to...

 

[Champakian]

The Left treats black people like children who need their help. That's racist.

All minorities and especially women.

Their greatest wrath is when those groups eschew their wisdom and protection.

 

[ll74]

I'm just not going to read a 288 page judgment written in legaleese. I'm sorry.

But, I did read that the judge couched this in terms of the right to vote, and preventing people from voting. To my knowledge, these laws do not prevent anyone from voting. They may change or reduce locations, but no one is being prevented from voting.

So, I'll ask, if all of these regulations were put into place, would anyone be prohibited from voting?

So you're saying it's there, but you haven't seen it and you're too lazy to prove your own claim

Got it.

Perhaps look up the term "undue burden". You would see it a lot if you read the ruling.

 

[pecksniff]

Times are hard for Democrats:​

​

After setbacks, House Republicans finishing strong on redistricting​

That's nothing to brag about. All you're saying is that the Pubs cheat better.

 

[pecksniff]

It's how you keep'em on the plantation.

 

[pecksniff]

I'm just not going to read a 288 page judgment written in legaleese. I'm sorry.

But, I did read that the judge couched this in terms of the right to vote, and preventing people from voting. To my knowledge, these laws do not prevent anyone from voting. They may change or reduce locations, but no one is being prevented from voting.

So, I'll ask, if all of these regulations were put into place, would anyone be prohibited from voting?

It's all statistical. RWs can no longer get away with blocking any individual from voting through poll taxes, literacy tests, etc. So they erect barriers that they know -- and they do it for no other purpose, certainly not "election integrity" -- will statistically deter more poor and POC voters than anyone else -- which might be enough to swing a close election their way.