General Discussion

MADem

(135,425 posts)

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

Sat Jul 23, 2016, 02:55 PM

Jul 2016

in any way, shape or form. Disenfranchising citizens, particularly those who have incurred a debt to society and PAID IT in full, is denying them a basic right and ostracizing them from our society, which encourages recidivism.

This is social science 101--not rocket science. Only the Republicans take such a backward view of the process, mainly because the fewer poor and brown and black people who vote, to say nothing of women, the better off they are.

I am a strong advocate for more, not less, gun control. I'm certainly not advocating punishing some weed smoking rasta who got sent up the river for twenty years on a dumb ass over-charge (Because War On Drugs!!!) any more or less than I'd punish a Trumpkid - looking inside trader who did a tour at Club Fed.

You've misread the law. McAuliffe is within his rights.

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