And just like the USSC wouldn't listen to the case of "In God We Trust" they ALSO didn't want to hear this balogna again.
Good for them. Now the dem party won't have all the convicted felons who support their party....voting for them....unless the FL.SC rules that they can.
Happy Dance!!!!
-----------------
High Court Won't Revisit Fla. Felon Voting
By GINA HOLLAND, Associated Press WriterMon Nov 14,10:24 PM ET
The Supreme Court refused Monday to review Florida's lifetime ban on voting rights for convicted felons, a case that would have had national implications for millions of would-be voters.
Justices declined to hear a challenge to Florida's 19th century ban, which applies to inmates and those who have served their time and been released.
Felons are kept from voting in every state but Maine and Vermont, although restrictions vary.
The issue of voter eligibility got renewed attention after the 2000 presidential election, which was decided by fewer than 600 votes in Florida.
The Florida appeal had been closely watched, because lower courts have been fractured in similar voting cases. Minority and voting rights groups urged justices to hear the case.
"The court not only missed an opportunity to right a great historic injustice, it has shut the courthouse door in the face of hundreds of thousands of disenfranchised citizens," Catherine Weiss, the Brennan Center for Justice lawyer for the Florida ex-felons, said Monday.
The Florida law was contested in 2000 in Miami on behalf of people who have already completed their punishments, including probation or parole.
Their appeal asked if restrictions can be challenged under the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which removed barriers to black voters. One in 10 black Florida adults, not counting current prisoners, is barred from voting, the court was told.
The case "involves the intersection of two rights that demand the highest level of constitutional protection: the right to participate in the political process and to be free of race discrimination in doing so," Weiss wrote in a filing.
Florida attorneys argued that states have authority to set their own policies.
Congress, in enacting the voting law, did not have the power to "intrude so deeply into the sovereign right over every state to set qualifications for voting and to establish punishments for felons," Washington attorney Charles Cooper, representing Florida, said in the state's filing.
Earlier this year, Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack issued an executive order automatically restoring voting rights to felons who have completed their sentences.
Previously, Iowa felons had to apply individually for clemency, a costly and lengthy process.
Florida also has a process for felons to seek their voting rights, but there is no guarantee of success.
The Supreme Court appeal was filed on behalf of more than 600,000 Florida felons.
The court has refused to deal with this issue before.
Last year, justices left intact a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that allowed current and former inmates to challenge as racially discriminatory a Washington state law stripping them of their right to vote. The high court also let stand a 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in the opposite direction, in the case of a convicted New York felon.
Nationwide, about 5 million people are ineligible to vote because of a felony conviction, according to The Sentencing Project, an advocacy group in Washington.
The case is Johnson v. Bush, 05-212.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on November 15, 2005 02:50:09 PM new
Come on Ron - everyone knows that conservatives do no wrong in Lindas eyes. So they certainly could not commit felonies
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
posted on November 15, 2005 03:49:20 PM new
Ron - In THIS case, from Florida and right after the 2000 election.....it was the democratic party who was upset and challenging this 137 year LAW.
They were looking for anyway they could pull a 'win' for Gore out of their hats.....this was just one example of what they tried to change to obtain that.
edited to add:
The dem party fought to not allow our MILITARY votes to count...you know the ones putting their lives on the line for all of us. But they wanted to give ex-cons the right they were trying to keep from our soldiers.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Nov 15, 2005 03:57 PM ]
posted on November 15, 2005 05:15:43 PM new
As far as "prisoners" having rights.... they lost them. Prison is supposed to suck, you are supposed to not want to go there. I work my tail off, obey the better part of the law (I can tend to drive fast), just to make ends meet it seems sometimes. We, law-abiding citizens, don't get free cable or college or free food or a roof over our heads. We do, however, get conjugal visits. That's a plus for us....
This is NOT the case with members of our armed services. Taking their right to vote is just not right. I had to vote via absentee ballot for 3 Presidential elections.
posted on November 15, 2005 05:50:25 PM new
Linda - Why must you lump all Liberals together? I'm a liberal and I don't think felons should be allowed to vote. I think they lost that right when they committed a crime. I'm sure there are many more Democrats that feel that same way.
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
posted on November 15, 2005 07:13:23 PM new
I think it's just fine...not a loss for liberals at all...boy are you reaching, Linda
____________________________________________
Habla siempre que debas y calla siempre que puedas....
posted on November 15, 2005 10:17:50 PM new
Reaching???? profe??
LOL LOL
Nope. It wasn't the Republican party that wanted all those illegal votes from ex-felons to count in the FL Presidential election - going against THEIR own 137 year long LAW.....it was the democrats.
AND they were arguing that the absentee ballots from our currently serving soldiers SHOULDN'T be counted.
No stretching there at all. Just pure facts.....kind of like our history of "In God We Trust" on our coins that YOU refuse to acknowledge.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on November 16, 2005 04:53:15 AM new
I haven't refused to acknowlege anything Linda. I've only spoken about the way in which you make gross generalizations in order to make your point. If your point was valid to begin with, you wouldn't need to word your posts in such a way that casual readers are led to believe that the pledge has contained the words "under god" as long as the words "in god we trust" have been on U.S. coins, nor would you need to word your post in such a way as to make it seem that all U.S. money has used that phrase since the 1800's, which also isn't true.
Now you'd like us to believe that this SC decision is somehow a loss for liberals. As if all liberals would necessarily be opposed to it. I'm not, and I bet I'm surely not the only one. I don't think convicted felons should be able to vote.
Everything's either a win for the right or a loss for the left with you...like it's some kind of contest or game.
Well, if it is, have you checked the scores lately?...latest Gallup poll shows only 39% of respondents think Republicans should control the congress. If this is some kinda shootin' match, you're runnin' outta ammo
____________________________________________
Habla siempre que debas y calla siempre que puedas....
posted on November 16, 2005 09:08:56 AM new
Appears it's time I tell you the same thing I've told others. YOU post how YOU wish to...and I will do the same. Thank you anyway.
Because liberals want to 'nit-pick' everything I say to death, as you did in the In God We Trust thread where I provided the link THREE TIMES, is not my problem NOR does it automatically mean I've done or said anything untrue. You all read a lot into my posts that I never say/said.
In this thread too, I have explained just WHO were the supporters behind allowing felons in FL to vote AND just which party was the one disputing the military votes. BOTH TIMES it was the dem. party.
I understand some don't want the truth put out there for all to read/understand....but I will continue doing so even with your objections. My choice.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on November 16, 2005 01:25:08 PM new
If you are a felon, then you lost your right to vote and to own a gun. I've seen enough white trash redneck felons in Florida who would love to own a gun as well, and most of them are are Republicans.
they ALSO didn't want to hear this balogna again. 
