More minority voter disenfranchisement from the Bush Cabal

[Mike Hunte]

Judge Rules Against 10,000 Floridians Barred From Voting
By ABBY GOODNOUGH

Published: October 27, 2004




IAMI, Oct. 26 - A federal district judge here dismissed a lawsuit Tuesday that was filed on behalf of more than 10,000 new voters whose registration forms had been rejected as incomplete.

The judge, James Lawrence King, said the labor unions that brought the case had no standing because they had not proved that any of their members were affected. Judge King also said several other plaintiffs, people who had turned in incomplete registration forms, could not blame their local elections supervisors, who were named as defendants.

"No federal or state statute,'' he wrote, "prescribes a time period within which a supervisor must notify an applicant that her application is incomplete.''

Sheila Thomas, a lawyer for the Advancement Project, a rights group that represented the plaintiffs, said, "We think the ruling is incorrect as a matter of law, and we are considering appealing it."

The suit, brought against elections supervisors in Broward, Miami-Dade and several other counties, charged that the rejected registration forms had come disproportionately from blacks and Hispanics. In some cases, the applicants did not check a box indicating that they were American citizens, though they signed an oath on the form affirming that they were. Some registrants corrected their incomplete forms before the Oct. 4 registration deadline, the suit said, but elections officials did not always process them in time, and did not let other registrants know that their forms were flawed.

The suit is among several charging voter disenfranchisement that are being fought by the administration of Gov. Jeb Bush.

In another case, the federal appeals court in Atlanta heard new arguments on Tuesday in a class-action suit seeking to end Florida's policy stripping all felons of the right to vote. That court is not expected to rule before Election Day.

The suit, filed just before the 2000 election by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, charges that the state's ban on felons' voting is racially discriminatory. It estimates that the law strips blacks of voting rights at more than twice the rate of whites. The plaintiffs are the 600,000 people with felony convictions who the Brennan Center estimates have finished serving their time in Florida yet still cannot vote.

The ban has been in effect since 1868, when Florida gave blacks the right to vote as a condition of the state's being readmitted to the Union after the Civil War. A new State Constitution drafted that year expanded the number of crimes that required disenfranchisement, a change that the plaintiffs say was intended to affect blacks disproportionately.

They also charge that the discriminatory intent persists, even though the provision was re-enacted in 1968 as part of a new Constitution.

A federal judge in Miami dismissed the suit in 2002. But in December a three-judge panel of the appeals court reversed the decision and ordered a trial, saying the state had to prove that it had re-enacted the provision for a "nondiscriminatory purpose" and not just for the sake of continuity.

Lawyers for Governor Bush, the defendant, asked for a rehearing, which is what took place before the full appeals court on Tuesday.

[Matt]

The suit, filed just before the 2000 election by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, charges that the state's ban on felons' voting is racially discriminatory.

Since the ban on felon voting applies to all felons, how is the ban discriminatory in any way?

[Mike Hunte]

Since the ban on felon voting applies to all felons, how is the ban discriminatory in any way?

Because, the *intent* of the ban is to disenfranchise black voters, who plainly outnumber whites in this particular social strata. As noted, these so-called "pseudo-felons" have finished their jail time (AND probation for that matter).

This is an archaic law that dates back to 1868 for the sole purpose of eliminating black votes. AFTER the Civil War (when the South lost and were given the concessions needed to get back into the union) THIS was the law they enacted to disenfranchise (through the use of the expanded, black-tilted crimes list). It should have been struck down back in the days of the 3/5's bullshit!

It's simply one more tool by the Bush Cabal to to cherry-pick their battles in a way that's advantageous to their outcome. You honestly think, Matt, that if the ratio of these "felons" were 2:1 white (instead of 2:1 black (i.e. 90%-Democrat)), that Jeb WOULDN"T be going out of his way to protect *these* voters' rights? Be honest.

In summary, they figured out a way to disenfranchise a subset group of voters that are disproportionally black. Period.

[Matt]

Because, the *intent* of the ban is to disenfranchise black voters, who plainly outnumber whites in this particular social strata. As noted, these so-called "pseudo-felons" have finished their jail time (AND probation for that matter).

Mike, I honestly have never really thought of the ban in a political manner. I have known felons are subject to voting conditions, and that these specific conditions are regulated on an individual state basis:

http://www.righttovote.org/state.asp

This is an archaic law that dates back to 1868 for the sole purpose of eliminating black votes. AFTER the Civil War (when the South lost and were given the concessions needed to get back into the union) THIS was the law they enacted to disenfranchise (through the use of the expanded, black-tilted crimes list). It should have been struck down back in the days of the 3/5's bullshit!

I see your point. It would seem, to me, that if you want to vote in FL then you should not be convicted of a felony! But seriously, I mentioned my rationale before, felons of all races are all treated the same way in Florida. I am aware the there are more black than white felons in Florida. This race ratio certainly is not the same case in all states, and felons in those states are still equally subject to thier individual states restrictions.

It's simply one more tool by the Bush Cabal to to cherry-pick their battles in a way that's advantageous to their outcome. You honestly think, Matt, that if the ratio of these "felons" were 2:1 white (instead of 2:1 black (i.e. 90%-Democrat)), that Jeb WOULDN"T be going out of his way to protect *these* voters' rights? Be honest

Honestly, as you demonstrate by reversing the situation above, it depends on which side of the fence you are on. Democrats may see this a Republicans attempt to suppress the vote. Republicans may see this as a Democrat attempt at getting votes. Funny how many don't worry about this until election time. In the end, Mike, it is politics as usual.