***Official Political Discussion Thread***

The Texas case
The Texas case, meanwhile, is Texas Democratic Party v. Abbott, and the stakes in that case are simply enormous.

Texas law permits voters over the age of 65 to request absentee ballots without difficulty. But most voters under the age of 65 are not allowed to vote absentee. During a pandemic election, that means that older voters — a demographic that has historically favored Republicans over Democrats — will have a fairly easy time participating in the November election. But younger voters will likely have to risk infection at an in-person polling site if they wish to cast a ballot.

This arrangement is difficult to square with the 26th Amendment, which provides that “the right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.”

The Court’s order in Texas Democratic Party is subtle, but it most likely means that Texas will be able to deny or abridge the right to vote on account of age, at least during the November election.

Last month, the conservative United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit blocked a trial judge’s order that would have allowed younger Texans to vote absentee. Although this Fifth Circuit order is not the appeals court’s last word on this case, it is quite unlikely that the plaintiffs in Texas Democratic Party will prevail before the Fifth Circuit, which is among the most conservative courts in the country.

So those plaintiffs asked the Supreme Court to hear their case on an expedited basis. On Friday, the Supreme Court denied that request. As a practical matter, writes SCOTUSBlog’s Amy Howe, this refusal to expedite the Texas Democratic Party case “all but eliminated the prospect that the justices will weigh in on the merits of that dispute before the 2020 election in November.”

Thus, even if the Supreme Court ultimately does decide that Texas’s age discrimination violates the 26th Amendment, that decision will almost certainly come too late to benefit anyone in November.
 
Taking the approach of "Let's presume Ghislaine Maxwell is innocent until proven guilty" is like after 9/11 going on FoxNews and being like "Listen let's not assume Bin Laden is guilty. Let's investigate and gather facts first"
 
I mean, Delk would’ve been arguing that Hitler deserved due process if he were alive then.
"Hitler just believed in strict immigration policies against Jewish people"
“There is nothing wrong with nationalism. Hitler was a nationalist.”

43F7EE11-9170-4920-B7FB-F05FD83C814A.gif
 
I mean... is she wrong? Good for her, she has more morals than her parents at 15.

at 15 I just wanted to blaze and party.

Edit, does she know delk??? Peep the “yikes” in her tweet. Must have been hitting on her at Dave and busters. I know how you conservatives do...

Claudia is Delk? Delk is Claudia?























Claudia has more morals than Delk so no.
 
Back
Top Bottom