Hot Take: Brett Kavanaugh Could End Voting Rights!!!!!1!!!!

The same people who always claim to be the smartest people in the room sure seem like unhinged prophets of doom. Here’s Ari Berman in the NY Times

Does Brett Kavanaugh Spell the End of Voting Rights?
If he is confirmed to the Supreme Court, we will see the most extreme court on civil rights since the er of Jim Crow (you know, that thing invented by Democrats)

In late 2011, the Obama administration blocked a South Carolina law that required voters to show a photo ID before casting their ballots, finding that it could disenfranchise tens of thousands of minority voters, who were more likely than whites to lack such IDs.

But when South Carolina asked a federal court in Washington to approve the law, Brett Kavanaugh wrote the opinion upholding it. He ruled that the measure was not discriminatory, even though the Obama administration claimed that it violated the Voting Rights Act.

Judge Kavanaugh, whom President Trump nominated for the Supreme Court recently, pointed to a 2008 Supreme Court decision upholding Indiana’s voter ID law, which he interpreted as giving states broad leeway to restrict their voting procedures. “Many states, particularly in the wake of the voting system problems exposed during the 2000 elections, have enacted stronger voter ID laws, among various other recent changes to voting laws,” he noted in approval.

So, wait, I thought that Democrats were all about upholding previous court decisions? Or does that only apply to Roe v Wade? Remember, these same Democrats want people to show photo ID and have a background check (I have no problem with this) for all gun purchases. They also want you to get a license. Yet, they are against photo ID to simply cast a vote. Something which most people have, and will be provided for lost cost or even free in the states that require one to vote. I’ve covered this way in the past many times. You need an ID to get into a DNC convention: why not to vote? Many, many states require ID to vote, including Democrat led ones.

In addition to voter ID laws, these “recent changes to voting laws” include polling place closings, new hurdles to voter registration, and cutbacks in early voting days. Since 2011, some 22 states, mostly controlled by Republicans, have passed laws to restrict access to the ballot, which disproportionately target Democratic constituencies such as people of color.

What he’s complaining about is early voting, when, in fact, the Constitution lays out a specific day for voting. But, what does that have to do with Kavanaugh? Nothing. In fact, the next eight paragraphs are just whines at Chief Justice Roberts and such.

Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination signals a disturbing shift in the historic role of the court. In the 1950s and 1960s, the civil rights movement looked to the Supreme Court for help in dismantling the architecture of white supremacy. And the court responded by desegregating public schools, upholding the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act and legalizing interracial marriage, to name a few landmark decisions. Representative John Lewis of Georgia described the court in those days as a “sympathetic referee.”

That era of strong civil rights enforcement is over. With Judge Kavanaugh on the bench, this will be the most extreme court on civil rights issues since the days of Jim Crow.

This is what’s called “making shit up” because you’re unhinged.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

33 Responses to “Hot Take: Brett Kavanaugh Could End Voting Rights!!!!!1!!!!”

  1. covjefe says:

    most extreme court on civil rights since the er of Jim Crow (you know, that thing invented by conservative white Democrats)


    • formwiz says:

      Franklin Roosevelt and Jack Kennedy thought they were just ducky, as long as the delivered a Solid South.

      • Zachriel says:

        Kennedy came out in support of civil rights legislation in June 1963, knowing it would erode his support in the South. That’s one reason he went to Texas in November.

        • david7134 says:

          It is best you don’t comment on things you did not live through like many of us. Kennedy was warned not to come South by almost every paper of the period. He was flat out told that he would be killed. We keep our word. Kennedy was absolute scum. He falsified his war record, he should have been court martialed but his father intervened. Kennedy brought us to the absolute edge of nuclear war with his stupidity. If the Russian had not been the true heroes of the Cuban crisis, then the planet would be toast. Kennedy was a passive pawn in civil rights. Eisenhower started much of it. LBJ, almost as bad as Obama, completed the loss of freedom that is the core of the civil rights legislation.

          • Zachriel says:

            david7134: He was flat out told that he would be killed. We keep our word.

            Wow. Just wow.

            So Kennedy traveled there, as was his right as an American citizen, in the aftermath of his speech on civil rights, and in the face of death threats — which you condoned.

          • jefferson says:

            Hi dave,

            So you were involved in the assassination of JFK, along with Ted Cruz’s daddy (at least according to our Idiot-in-Chief). Not surprised. Were you the grassy knoll assassin?

            We understand the psychic shock that rippled through the peckerwood class, first by getting trounced during the Confederate Rebellion and then during the civil rights period. Scientists now think the terror of losing the Southern way of life (i.e., enslaving other humans) has been passed down generations by epigenetic phenomenon. Of course white nationalists like you hate Kennedy and Johnson – they helped erode your white privilege. “President” tRump is firmly in your camp, though. At least for a while.

            You may not remember this, but when the Confederate traitors attacked America, they were soundly defeated by American patriots over a century and a half ago. To this day, the poorest states in this US comprise the old confederacy, likely because your klan never overcame the terror of losing your Confederate Revolt.

          • jefferson says:

            Dave typed:

            He was flat out told that he would be killed. We keep our word.

            You’re making less and less sense.

            So the South threatened to kill JFK, but it turned out a communist who tried to defect to Russia was the assassin, and because he hated Kennedy’s anti-communist stance.

            I thought you said you southern racists kept your word? Did you guys hire a communist to do your dirty work for you?

            And Oswald was assassinated by a Dallas mobster who was distraught that Kennedy was murdered.

          • david7134 says:

            As I said, you should not comment on things that you did not live through. The reason for this is that rarely does written history actually reflect what occurred. Now, when Kennedy was killed, I was in civics class, something you have no idea of. When the announcement was made, the whole class stood up and cheered. It was only when we went to church that people in the area were told we should show some remorse. The only problem with his death was that it took up TV time for your favorite shows. Remember that Kennedy escalated the Vietnam war and between Kennedy and LBJ, they killed about 60,000 young men, then others were injured and retain mental and physical scars and disability. You don’t know a thing about how our government could force you into the military, take your youth and have leaders so incompetent that your death could be considered murder. Kennedy was part of the trash doing this, despite. I have no remorse that he was killed, it was justice.

          • Zachriel says:

            david7134: When the announcement was made, the whole class stood up and cheered.

            Wow. Just wow. So Kennedy traveled there, as was his right as an American citizen, in the aftermath of his speech on civil rights, and in the face of death threats — and you cheered along with the whole class.


        • david7134 says:

          My only response to you is to read and try to retain something. Now that I am aware of the remedial course in education that you took, I suggest a return to a higher level of instruction. You don’t even understand the concept of treason in our republic.

          • jefferson says:

            You know nothing about my education.

            And didn’t you go to LSU with David Duke, LOL. Let me know when YOU go back to school.

            It says more about your schooling than Kennedy that you and your school chums cheered when he was assassinate. We get it, you grew up hating African-Americans.

            Although it’s neck and neck, you’re the dumbest commenter here. And you may be the second most vile. Your competitors know who they are.

  2. covjefe says:

    The new Party of tRump (Tea Baggers + white nationalists + Christian fundamentalists) love tRump more than they love America.

    They hate liberals more than they love America.

    This is a problem for America.

    • drowningpuppies says:

      “Be puttin’ y’all back in chainzzzzzz-zah!”

    • formwiz says:

      No, we love America so we hate the Leftists (there hasn’t been a Liberal in this country since Hubert Humphrey) who want to destroy it by turning it into another Socialist Workers’ Paradise.

      Like Cuba.

      Or Venezuela.

      Or North Korea.

      • jeffy says:

        The problem with you NuCon white nationalists is that you don’t understand America.

        You’re threatened, not by Social Democrats, but by non-white, non-Christian, non-hetero etc… Muslims, Mexicans, Blacks, gays… anyone who threatens your white privilege.

        Certainly we’d prefer a country with the social infrastructure and worker protections of Sweden or France or Switzerland or Germany or Denmark or Japan etc.

        Why do you only cite failed fascist states?

  3. drowningpuppied says:

    Sooo, little jeffery keene of st. louis issuing threats again.

    Do the white people at Galera know you post this shit?

  4. Jeffery says:

    Threats? You’re the only commenter here who has made credible threats, at least according to the law.

    You’re nothing more than a disembodied fake name, unless the authorities found reason to gather your information. And it would take someone’s corporate lawyer to make that happen, so you’re probably safe. Corporations tend to be very sensitive to threats against them.

    On the other hand if one was to track down your personal info, say an address, and then post it with the intent to intimidate or harass that’s a crime now in most states. Has someone done that to you??

    If so, I know a spectacularly effective Brooklyn NY law firm who handles such things (and the managing partner is easy on the eyes, if you liked women). Let me know how you wish to proceed.

    • drowningpuppies says:

      Oh, threatening again huh?

      Pretty sure your “corporate lawyer” told you that same things I did.
      You stupidly revealed your own identity and the place where you live and work online.
      Then you stupidly confirmed it.
      Then you probably were told that no one is forcing you to continue to post your personal vitriol online and you should probably “tone it down” or cease posting altogether because you have an exposure problem not only for youself but also for your company too.
      And since no credible threats have been made against you or your company you have no legal cause for action.
      And the final thing your “corporate lawyer” probably told you was that you are incredibly fvcking stupid and you need to stop wasting his time.

      Did I leave anything out?

      • Jeffery says:

        You made, more than once, the only credible threats, and more just, even more threatening now too! And we confirmed nothing.

        Are you suggesting we should stop commenting here or you’ll use more “effective” intimidation tactics? You implied you would contact the corporation whose address you posted. Or were you hoping someone braver than you would “visit”? That’s certainly a reasonable assumption.

        TEACH could block either of us to stop your harassment threats.

        Why don’t you try arguing using facts, evidence and reason?

        • driwningpuppies says:

          You’re lying again, little Jeffery keene of st. louis, but that’s what you do.

          And as for your inferences and assumptions, you might want to listen to that “corporate” lawyer or that pretty little thing on Brooklyn.

          • Jeffery says:

            Just so long as you’ve learned your lesson.

          • drowningpuppies says:

            What I’ve learned is there is no need to back down from liars especially stupid little dumbfvcks, like little jeffery keene, who think they can issue hollow threats to intimidate people over the internet.

            Nice try though, little dumbass.


          • Jeffery says:

            That’s your choice.

      • david7134 says:

        He just told I assume and the dumbest commenter so don’t try to steal my loving relationship with our boy jeff.

        He really does show his roots as a pharmacist and clearly indicated his remedial academic record. I have never seen someone so dumb.

        • jedediah says:

          Sorry, dave, I’m not a pharmacist, although if I were I’d do so proudly. They’re smarter than doctors, and kill far fewer people. But like doctors, pharmacist numbers are limited by the government to keep their pay up.

          • david7134 says:

            Just when you think you have peaked on stupid statement, you come up with another.

  5. Jeffery says:

    Just so you know, I’ve been doxed three times. So far, only two of the three times ended poorly for the doxers.

Pirate's Cove