General Discussion

malthaussen

(18,369 posts)

80. Stipulating that the VA court voted on purely partisan lines...

Sat Jul 23, 2016, 02:10 PM

Jul 2016

... a matter on which I am not competent to comment, you seem to be asserting that if the Court were politicized in another direction, the constitutionality of the Governor's act would have been affirmed.

But I am not, for the present, interested in the legal question, but rather in the question of right. Should it within the purview of the executive branch to decide who has and has not the right to vote? Is there precedent established that it is? Or has it rather, for good or ill, been a question subject to the Legislature with judicial review?

Bush v Gore does not apply.

And to forestall any question on the subject, I do not favor, as a matter of right, that felons should be denied the right to vote once their sentence has been completed.

-- Mal

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

145 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Virginia Governor Bypasses Court Ruling To Help 200,000 Ex-Felons Vote [View all] babylonsister Jul 2016 OP

And it'll be struck down again because the plain text of the constitution requires Press Virginia Jul 2016 #1

Is there a provision in the constitution that he can act without the legislature if they are MADem Jul 2016 #2

No. This all could have been avoided if TM had followed the constitution Press Virginia Jul 2016 #3

You, I'm afraid, are wrong. See post five. MADem Jul 2016 #8

It's not permission. It's the process according to the constitution Press Virginia Jul 2016 #10

That's right - It it NOT "permission." It says "Let us know what you have done." MADem Jul 2016 #24

If it were, the court wouldn't have struck it down Press Virginia Jul 2016 #78

Now you are convoluting. MADem Jul 2016 #86

So the insane guy should be voting, right along with the other felons currently Press Virginia Jul 2016 #91

You are way out of step with the Democratic Party on this matter. MADem Jul 2016 #105

So it was racist because of the color of the judges? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #107

The process IS clear--the governor is going to provide clemency, and MADem Jul 2016 #109

As long as he does it the correct way, I don't care. Press Virginia Jul 2016 #112

The correct way, since a partisan court interfered with him, is to sign each one and hand them out. MADem Jul 2016 #113

The partisan court came to the same conclusion Tim Kaine did in 2010 Press Virginia Jul 2016 #114

Tim Kaine knew he couldn't beat a racist court. nt MADem Jul 2016 #117

How is a practice that isn't based on race racist? And if their opinions are the same Press Virginia Jul 2016 #118

I've had about enough of your GOP talking points. nt MADem Jul 2016 #119

Funny how my views are the same as the current VP pick's with regard to this issue Press Virginia Jul 2016 #120

No, they aren't. nt MADem Jul 2016 #124

Really? Tim Kaine, the SCOVA and I have all said the governor doesn't have the Press Virginia Jul 2016 #126

me too SheriffBob Jul 2016 #138

EarlG has done us all a great service. nt MADem Jul 2016 #141

Where does it say the actions are not valid until presented? It doesn't. Hassin Bin Sober Jul 2016 #127

If they are not presented then the process has not been fulfilled Press Virginia Jul 2016 #128

didn't think he had it in him. Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #13

so....200000 secondsx10 seconds, divided by 3600=how many hours? Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #6

What a loon! All that, over being named a "CNN CONTRIBUTOR?" MADem Jul 2016 #12

I don't have anything else to do....just waiting to change my sprinkler locations Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #16

Quack PAC--LOL!!!! nt MADem Jul 2016 #37

I've signed a lot of documents. My rate is 25 per minute. n/t Scruffy1 Jul 2016 #62

Does that require someone to challenge each individual case in court, though? spooky3 Jul 2016 #4

His "experts" assured him his first attempt was constitutional Press Virginia Jul 2016 #14

Did you read the article? spooky3 Jul 2016 #18

The only black and white that matters is what the plain text of what the constitution says Press Virginia Jul 2016 #20

And it has been quoted, and it is clear as a bell, yet you keep ignoring it. MADem Jul 2016 #25

Too hard by half...his/her "resistance" is showing. LOL! Surya Gayatri Jul 2016 #99

But he knows history and stuff. Hassin Bin Sober Jul 2016 #129

Good gravy--all you need is a wagging finger to go with! LOL! nt MADem Jul 2016 #130

so what? have you heard of Bush v. gore? Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #29

I stand with the constitutional process requiring individual orders Press Virginia Jul 2016 #34

This restores rights to people who have DISCHARGED their debt to society. MADem Jul 2016 #41

that non anwer told us all we need to know Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #44

Yes. I don't understand support for disenfranchisement. It's wrong. nt MADem Jul 2016 #47

They had their rights revoked after getting due process. They aren't owed anything Press Virginia Jul 2016 #81

Are you serious? MADem Jul 2016 #104

I don't take marching orders from any party. You want your rights back, earn them Press Virginia Jul 2016 #106

The rational mind concludes the rights have indeed, been earned back LanternWaste Jul 2016 #143

I guess the ones who were found to be currently in prison Press Virginia Jul 2016 #77

please cite legitimate and reliable sources, and name those individuals referenced in your post. niyad Jul 2016 #56

where did it go? unsupported assertions remind you of similar discussion tactics? Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #58

oh dear, was it something I said? I know, it is so hard for some to understand that we niyad Jul 2016 #60

didn't mean for you to think it was you to whom I referred. Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #61

not to worry, I knew who you meant. niyad Jul 2016 #63

Here Press Virginia Jul 2016 #69

from the article niyad Jul 2016 #70

Yeah...if it hadn't been looked into by WaPo Press Virginia Jul 2016 #73

Their slip is showing, that's for sure RonniePudding Jul 2016 #64

Nope. Just want it to be done in accordance wity Press Virginia Jul 2016 #74

Righhhhht RonniePudding Jul 2016 #79

If it had been done the correct way, I wouldn't have a problem with it Press Virginia Jul 2016 #82

The constitution doesn't require the legislature to be in session for him to act Major Nikon Jul 2016 #5

"At each regular session" Press Virginia Jul 2016 #7

Doesn't say that Major Nikon Jul 2016 #9

If it's not presented to the legislature, it's not met the constitutional requirement Press Virginia Jul 2016 #11

As said, the constitution doesn't say that and it's a pretty poor assumption Major Nikon Jul 2016 #21

Really? So you believe if the order of clemency is never presented it is still valid? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #22

So how do you explain the fact that Robin Lovitt is still alive? Major Nikon Jul 2016 #23

I doubt seriously your interpretation would hold up in court. WillowTree Jul 2016 #53

It's never even been so much as challenged Major Nikon Jul 2016 #54

When he gets shot down again, and he will, maybe you'll understand the process Press Virginia Jul 2016 #83

If it's so easy to understand, why can't you explain how Robin Lovitt is still alive? Major Nikon Jul 2016 #85

because Warner followed the process and presented it to the assembly Press Virginia Jul 2016 #87

The governor's order was clemency. It was either valid or it wasn't. Major Nikon Jul 2016 #95

Using that logic, there is no need to report the clemency to the legislature Press Virginia Jul 2016 #108

You mean other than the requirement to do so in the constitution? Major Nikon Jul 2016 #115

You've just argued the clemency was constitutionally valid at the time granted Press Virginia Jul 2016 #116

The difference being I supported my assertion any you haven't Major Nikon Jul 2016 #121

So now you're back to arguing it was constitutionally valid when granted Press Virginia Jul 2016 #122

200,000 individual suits will have to be filed, then. MohRokTah Jul 2016 #27

No, not how it works. former9thward Jul 2016 #102

You're misreading the document. All it says is "Tell us what you did." MADem Jul 2016 #17

If it is never presented, is it valid? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #19

Non-sequitur Major Nikon Jul 2016 #26

No it's not. It addresses a requirement in the process Press Virginia Jul 2016 #31

It's not a requirement to grant the clemency. That's where you're screwing up. MADem Jul 2016 #33

Governor Mark R. Warner granted clemency in November to Robin Lovitt Major Nikon Jul 2016 #38

And his clemency wasn't constitutionally valid Press Virginia Jul 2016 #42

So are you trying to say the state should have put him to death since his clemency wasn't valid yet? Major Nikon Jul 2016 #43

I said it wasn't valid until the process was complete Press Virginia Jul 2016 #68

You are dodging the question Major Nikon Jul 2016 #72

He is also insisting that jailbirds are going to be voting from behind bars, MADem Jul 2016 #46

exactly! now, see post 45 Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #48

Too bad, for you, the WaPo found examples of people currently serving sentences in other states Press Virginia Jul 2016 #84

Keep cheering for disenfranchisement--you do realize you are arguing the GOP position? MADem Jul 2016 #89

How do you disenfranchise people who lost their rights after due process? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #92

"Separate but equal" used to be the law of the land, too. Didn't make it right, MADem Jul 2016 #94

So you'd be all for these new voters getting their right to own guns restored Press Virginia Jul 2016 #97

It's the epitome of a non-sequitur Major Nikon Jul 2016 #36

His clemency was not constitutionally valid until Press Virginia Jul 2016 #39

So why is he still alive? Major Nikon Jul 2016 #40

You mean other than the fact the governor fulfilled his constitutional obligation? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #93

Are you going to answer the question or not? Major Nikon Jul 2016 #96

I have. Repeatedly. Surely you're not going to make believe a state employee Press Virginia Jul 2016 #98

Was the order valid or not? Major Nikon Jul 2016 #100

All he has to do is drop it in the mail to them, or have a courier bring it to the legislative head, MADem Jul 2016 #28

everyone please ask this poster what its position is on voter supression Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #45

bravo! Blue_Tires Jul 2016 #15

And this is Terry "Waaah DLC tool, blah blah blah corporate blah blah blah" McAuliffe, too. MADem Jul 2016 #35

McAuliffe has been an awesome governor. n/t FSogol Jul 2016 #52

I am so happy to hear that--I am glad he's doing good, and doing right by the citizens of the MADem Jul 2016 #55

I'll admit even though I voted for him, I was a huge doubter... Blue_Tires Jul 2016 #101

I will never understand how felon disenfranchisement is even constitutional. nt SunSeeker Jul 2016 #30

The states get to decide who gets to vote Major Nikon Jul 2016 #49

What rational "cause" warrants taking away the most basic right of citizenship? SunSeeker Jul 2016 #50

The idea is that those who can't follow the law shouldn't be allowed to make it for others Major Nikon Jul 2016 #51

I started a thread on voter suppression being perhaps the most important issue Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #57

I think Vermont and Maine have the right idea Major Nikon Jul 2016 #65

That makes no sense. We have all broken some law at some point. SunSeeker Jul 2016 #59

That idea would mean the disenfranchisement of the GOP pennylane100 Jul 2016 #75

Their felons are simply in the nicer jails, the country clubs. nt MADem Jul 2016 #90

unfortunately, the Supreme Court has refused to apply this analysis to felon disenfranchisement JustinL Jul 2016 #135

Yes, there's a long list of cases that need overturning. SunSeeker Jul 2016 #136

there's also a particular cruel irony with that case JustinL Jul 2016 #137

Considering the massively disparate impact of felon disenfranchisement... SunSeeker Jul 2016 #139

Excellent tactic!! lark Jul 2016 #32

That's a lot of signing. malthaussen Jul 2016 #66

how much of the thread did you read? Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #67

All of it, why? malthaussen Jul 2016 #71

as did the SCOTUS decide that gore overreached in demanding that ALL votes be counted Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #76

Stipulating that the VA court voted on purely partisan lines... malthaussen Jul 2016 #80

It comes under the governor's clemency. Nevernose Jul 2016 #123

Thanks for that. malthaussen Jul 2016 #132

Both the state and federal Constitutions made it easier for the Executive... Hassin Bin Sober Jul 2016 #133

It's essential for the balance of powers Nevernose Jul 2016 #134

It's never made any sense to continue to punish criminals after they've paid their debt to underahedgerow Jul 2016 #88

No such thing as an "ex felon" frankieallen Jul 2016 #103

Oh yeah? Tell that to a host of publications, (check Google) and NPR. MADem Jul 2016 #111

Oh yeah? Is there any such thing as a former murderer? A former rapist? frankieallen Jul 2016 #142

Well, it's possible they used to be whatthehey Jul 2016 #144

Those are different things--stop trying to equate them. MADem Jul 2016 #145

Once you complete your sentence Abq_Sarah Jul 2016 #110

This makes me smile Gothmog Jul 2016 #125

I can't speak for anyone else here Tsiyu Jul 2016 #131

In 1902, what was the INTENT of the VA constitutional convention that disfranchised 'felons'? ProgressiveEconomist Jul 2016 #140