In response to:

Obama says the Supreme Court "made a mistake" in voting rights ruling

wtmoore1 Wrote: Jun 27, 2013 9:00 AM
Not even close. The implications of striking down Section 4 are immediate and drastic--the total inoperability of Section 5 that relies on Sec. 4 to establish which states must submit to Sec. 5 preclearance. Without an amendment from Congress, which seems unlikely in the House, the most successful piece of legislation in American history will be destroyed. And it took Texas a whole day to start rolling back protections. This is EXACTLY why preclearance was so necessary to begin with.
David1735 Wrote: Jun 27, 2013 10:19 AM
The decision struck Section 4, which makes Section 5 moot unless Congress establishes new criteria. But it did not strike Section 3, which still allows individuals and the DOJ (ugh!) to file suits. But, since there are now no STATUTORY criteria, the plaintiff must PROVE discrimination. What a concept.
pascagoulapappy Wrote: Jun 27, 2013 10:06 AM
Rolling back protections ? Are you crazy, dishonest, or just plain jack stupid?
americathebeautiful Wrote: Jun 27, 2013 9:50 AM
OMG WasteTrollmoore, you truly are completely "BRAIN DEAD"

YOU and your demented comrades ALL just hate those days of long ago because YOU and ALL of your comrades want to help the ANTI-American prez to "fundamentally transform" our beloved America.
YET, when it comes to that horrifically ANTIQUATED "pre-approval" to be approved by the most criminal branch in the administration....the DOJ and its lead CRIMINAL, holder, YOU and YOUR CRIMINAL ILK wants THAT ANTIQUATED horror to remain in place.

GO AWAY WasteTrollmoore!
BabyChe'sCrushedSkull Wrote: Jun 27, 2013 9:42 AM
What "protections" would those be? Next.

DAKAR, Senegal (AP) — Obama says the Supreme Court "made a mistake" in voting rights ruling .