by John Galt » Tue Jun 25, 2013 8:20 pm
so you are saying that "exceptional conditions", the basis for the 1966 ruling, no longer exist?
sure, they said "may". doesn't matter, the important part is why they said it was "legal": exceptional conditions. so why is it unconstitutional? because the 10th amendment ensures states can regulate elections. that some formula makes some states have to ask permission to make any changes is outrageous as it violates the principle of equal sovereignty of the states: why should one state get a pass and another not? the only reason is because of "exceptional conditions", which don't exist anymore. it's using a formula of "did you used to have literacy tests and if so, was voter turn out in 1964 12 points or more less than the national average" and if they meet those conditions, they then have to ask the feds for permission to move polling places down the street. literacy tests... what is this, 1964? nope. it's 2013. there hasn't been literacy tests in two generations but it's still beholden to that
Americans learn only from catastrophe and not from experience. -- Theodore Roosevelt
My life has become a single, ongoing revelation that I haven’t been cynical enough.