Following the SCOTUS opinion that upheld Ohio’s right to purge old voting rolls, Sotomayor wrote an dissenting opinion that did not discuss the constitutionality of the majority opinion. She launched into a community organizer, SJW rant about disenfranchisement.
The case dealt with whether Ohio was violating law, not whether their politics were correct.
The wise Latina fails to distinguish that difference, like all goon squad leftist activist jurists. It’s why these cretins should be kept off the bench.
Justice Alito, joined by Kennedy, Roberts, Gorsuch and Thomas, found that the Ohio process complied with the law. The alleged legal violation, that Ohio relied on mere non-voting to strike someone from the voter rolls, was not consistent with the facts. Ohio used a process, allowed by the statute, of sending a card to people who have not voted for two years asking them to confirm whether they have moved. If the card is not returned, the person would not be removed unless the person did not vote in the subsequent two federal election cycles. So it would take a total of 6 years not voting PLUS failure to return the card to be removed.
Justice Breyer wrote a dissent disagreeing with the statutory construction of the majority.
But it was Justice Sotomayor’s dissent which evoked the particular ire of the majority, who saw it as a policy disagreement with Congress:
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR’s dissent says nothing about what is relevant in this case—namely, the language of the NVRA—but instead accuses us of “ignor[ing] the history of voter suppression” in this country and of “uphold[ing] a program that appears to further the . . . disenfranchisement of minority and low-income voters.” Post, at 5. Those charges are misconceived.
The NVRA prohibits state programs that are discriminatory, see §20507(b)(1), but respondents did not assert a claim under that provision. And JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR has not pointed to any evidence in the record that Ohio instituted or has carried out its program with discriminatory intent.
* * *
The dissents have a policy disagreement, not just with Ohio, but with Congress. But this case presents a question of statutory interpretation, not a question of policy. We have no authority to second-guess Congress or to decide whether Ohio’s Supplemental Process is the ideal method for keeping its voting rolls up to date. The only question before us is whether it violates federal law. It does not.
The judgment of the Sixth Circuit is reversed.
And sure enough, Sotomayor’s dissent (starting at page 54 of the pdf.) read like a political manifesto:
READ HERE
“Meanwhile, the Bronxdale Houses had fallen victim to increasing heroin use, crime, and the emergence of the Black Spades gang. In 1970, the family found refuge by moving to Co-op City in the Northeast Bronx.” – Wiki
The Lower Justice’s mom lived in the same building, 22, as my mom. May Mom RIP.
By finding refuge? That means they left a hell hole in the 70’s Bronx to go to a decent place a couple of miles away.
Believe me!
Question: Why didn’t they stay in the Bronxdale PROJECTS?
Maybe because it was better somewhere else again IF only miles away???
Was that Puerto Rican Flight?
I remember the Spades and the Black Lords…
MAGA2016
KAG2020
I don’t understand. Are minorities more likely to not vote and to ignore official letters than other people groups?
Feckless Jurist
Hey at least you know where she is coming from. Balls to the wall leftist.
What a KUNT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Name the President who put her on the Fed bench?
Hint
1991
This is the type of person with a minority chip on her shoulder she usually keeps just under the surface. This time she couldn’t help herself.
He was put in that position to do what she is doing, that is to disrupt and twist the laws meaning.
It’s not about upholding the law with people like her, it’s about getting even with the country for their perceived slights.
It’s way past time to have some type of vehicle to remove a supreme court judge other than assassination.
Perhaps a recall petition block on our national biannual elections requiring a certain percentage of voters approval? But getting this through congress would be damn near impossible. Still lifetime appointments with no recourse for removal is not in the countries best interest.
Two more picks to go and it will right itself for years to come.
I still think she looks like Teddy Roosevelt, and wearing a wig she found at a yard sale.
Any bets that Ginsberg will cling on to life for 6 more years?
240grJHP
That would be with a “C” and not a “K,” let’s watch the spelling please!