Courts & Law

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Judge Richard Posner of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals is one of the leading intellectual leaders of the conservative movement. He is a sought after speaker at conservative events.

Judge Posmer wrote the majority opinion for the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in the Indiana voter I.D. case, and his majority opinion was the foundation for the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Crawford v. Marion County Election Bd., 128 S. Ct. 1610 (2008).

Rick Hasen at electionlawblog.com reports Breaking: Judge Posner Admits He Was Wrong in Crawford Voter ID Case:

Wow.

My transcription from HuffPostLive:

In response to Mike Sacks’s questions about whether Judge Posner and
the 7th circuit got it wrong in Crawford case, the one upholding
Indiana’s tough voter id law against constitutional challenge:

“Yes. Absolutely. And the problem is that there hadn’t been that much
activity with voter identification. And … maybe we should have been
more imaginative… we…. weren’t really given strong indications that
requiring additional voter identification would actually disfranchise
people entitled to vote. There was a dissenting judge, Judge Evans,
since deceased, and I think he is right. But at the time I thought what
we were doing was right. It is interesting that the majority opinion was
written by Justice Stevens, who is very liberal, more liberal than I
was or am….  But I think we did not have enough information. And of
course it illustrates the basic problem that I emphasize in book.  We
judges and lawyers, we don’t know enough about the subject matters that
we regulate, right? And that if the lawyers had provided us with a lot
of information about the abuse of voter identification laws, this case
would have been decided differently.”

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Arizona Attorney General Tom "banned for life by the SEC" Horne and Arizona Secretary of State Ken "Birther" Bennett have conspired with nativist anti-immigrant activist and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach to devise a "two-tier" voter registration system in their Neo-Confederate temper tantrum for "states' rights!" against the federal government. Creating two separate classes of voters based solely upon the registration form used violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, and is an overt act of voter suppression.

Today the New York Times takes notice, After
Court Ruling, 2 States Plan 2-Tier Voting System:

Barred by the Supreme Court from requiring proof of citizenship for
federal elections, Arizona is complying — but setting up a separate
registration system for local and state elections that will demand such
proof.

The
state this week joined Kansas in planning for such a two-tiered voting
system, which could keep thousands of people from participating in state
and local elections, including next year’s critical cycle, when top
posts in both states will be on the ballot.

The
states are using an opening left in June by the United States Supreme
Court when it said that the power of Congress over federal elections was
paramount but did not rule on proof of citizenship in state elections.
Such proof was required under Arizona’s Proposition 200, which passed in
2004 and is one of the weapons in the border state’s arsenal of laws
enacted in its battle against illegal immigration.

The
two states are also jointly suing the federal Election Assistance
Commission, arguing that it should change the federal voter registration
form for their states to include state citizenship requirements. While
the agency has previously denied such requests, the justices said the
states could try again and seek judicial review of those decisions.

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Judge Mary Jacobson, who last month ordered the state
to allow same sex marriages because she said gay couples are being
denied equal rights "every day," Thursday wrote that delaying the start
date would prolong "violations of their constitutional rights." Christie to appeal judge's ruling allowing same-sex marriage:

[Judge Mary Jacobson] refused to delay the Oct. 21 start date she set to begin same-sex
marriages in New Jersey, rejecting the Christie administration’s
contention that no gay weddings should be peformed while the case is
still being fought in the courts.

* * *

It’s possible the Oct. 21 start date could still be put on hold. The
Christie administration quickly responded Thursday by requesting the
state Appellate Division grant the delay instead. The appeals court
could consider the motion as soon as next week, according to filing
deadlines it set for both sides to make their case.

Gay rights advocates applauded Jacobson’s decision.