D.C. Court sets Tx voter ID trial for July 9-13
From Michael Li’s “Texas Redistricting” Web site, earlier today:
The D.C. district court has set trial in Texas’ voter ID suit for July 9-13.
That’s nearly three weeks earlier than requested by the Justice Department and intervenors.
However, the court also directed that issues related to the constitutionality of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act be bifurcated from the main trial and said that those issues would “not be addressed unless the Court denies judicial preclearance of Senate Bill [14].”
Since that means that hearings on constitutional issues would take place only after a ruling on the preclearance claims (by definition some time after the July 13 end of trial), that would seem to make it less likely that the constitutional issues could be teed up in time to get them to the Supreme Court before the November elections.
The court’s scheduling order set a discovery cutoff of June 15 for both fact and expert testimony and directed that any dispositive motions (such as a motion for summary judgment) be filed by June 18.
Li is an indispensable resource on the topic of redistricting. I appreciate the opportunity to publish his report with his permission.
Distinguished Gentleman says:
Paul, please look into the possibility of having a keyword search function on your blog to make it quicker to find past Burka Blog mention of certain people or of certain things. Thanks.
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
March 29th, 2012 at 12:24 am
That would be a good idea.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
March 31st, 2012 at 11:16 am
I will inquire. Thanks for the suggestion.
Reply »
Dave says:
Just use the Texas Monthly one (top right corner). You may get some extra hits from other places, but it will search BurkaBlog.
Reply »
Kool Aid Man says:
OH YEAH!!!!!
Reply »
Texian Politico says:
Here’s a good NYT story for Morrow about the Ron Paul campaign and how all of its money and enthusiasm has failed to turn into votes. What do you make of it Morrow?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/28/us/politics/in-ron-pauls-campaign-strength-and-weakness.html?pagewanted=1&_r=3&ref=politics
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
March 29th, 2012 at 12:26 am
2% to 4% of Americans are libertarians. They are often very intense and enthusiastic, often very intelligent and well informed, but they are a minority.
I do think they have influence beyond their numbers.
Reply »
Texian Politico Reply:
March 29th, 2012 at 7:45 am
That sounds about right to me on all accounts.
Reply »
allmaya Reply:
March 30th, 2012 at 10:22 am
Thanks for not trying to spin this, Robert.
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks says:
Greg Abbott either loses or wins the argument that legislators can be or can not deposed under oath about conversations both private and public with each other during the Voter I.D. legislative process. This could be an important part of the hearings if legislators are allowed to be deposed or have to give a deposition under oath.
Reply »
Another Wilco Voter Reply:
March 28th, 2012 at 1:04 pm
Oath or not, legislators will lie. It’s what politicians do.
Reply »
Blue Dogs Reply:
March 28th, 2012 at 3:41 pm
Abbott will likely win the arugment over Voter ID in the US Supreme Court.
He could be a future Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court (see Earl Warren of CA, who went from the governorship to the SC).
Reply »
Willie James Reply:
March 30th, 2012 at 9:31 am
That would take a hard right president in place at the right time.
Reply »
Blue Reply:
March 29th, 2012 at 7:40 pm
Demanding depositions of legislators about the passage of a law seems a clear violation of separation of powers to me.
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks says:
Under the second Obama administration Abbott will have to run against Perry or keep his current job which is filing lawsuits against the federal government at Rick Perry’s request.
Reply »
Willie James Reply:
March 30th, 2012 at 9:32 am
Sounds right to me.
Reply »
Blue Dogs Reply:
March 30th, 2012 at 10:46 am
Kenneth, Perry is NOT running again in 2014 and he’s already given Abbott the green light to the Governor’s Mansion.
Reply »
TruthBtold says:
Food for thought: Mexico has a voter ID card and mexicans have to undergo facial recognition procedures to safeguard their elections So why the F#ck des the State not want secure and fair elections?
Burka, you consistently claim that the voter id is discriminatory, yet UT/Trib. Poll has Hispanics favoring voter ID 67%? What’s the deal? Why have you become a cheerleader for the TDP agenda knowing full well that the State is with Integrity in our elections?
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
March 28th, 2012 at 11:53 pm
The Texas Democratic party has no agenda, so I can hardly be a cheerleader for it. So what if Hispanics favor Voter ID by 67%? That’s an interesting stat, but it doesn’t mean that Voter ID isn’t discriminatory.
Reply »
Texian Politico Reply:
March 29th, 2012 at 7:47 am
The Democrats don’t have an agenda? That’s the biggest lie I’ve ever read on this site. All politicians and parties have agendas.
Reply »
Willie James Reply:
March 30th, 2012 at 9:33 am
There is no Texas Democratic Party, therefore no agenda.
paulburka Reply:
March 31st, 2012 at 11:18 am
That’s my point. Thanks.
Kenneth D. Franks says:
National I.D. Card, but Republicans won’t support it. They, the right wingers will say it is the mark of the beast or some other crazy s–t.
Reply »
Art Reply:
March 30th, 2012 at 9:34 am
The crazies only want ID on minorities. Microchipping them would be ok….
Reply »
Bob Lee Reply:
March 30th, 2012 at 2:04 pm
How can a voter ID card be OK with the wingnut right, and not a national ID card?
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
General Abbott has had over 50 convictions for voter fraud in the last 2 years. He’s a hero to the law abiding citizens of Texas.
Reply »
LL42's SuperPac Reply:
March 30th, 2012 at 4:41 pm
And a tort-reformer who made his millions off of..
Reply »
anita Reply:
March 31st, 2012 at 11:16 am
Please provide a link to court decisions proving up these ‘convictions’. We’ll be waiting . . .
Reply »
longleaf says:
Technology is moving far beyond ID cards. The so-called “beast” system you’ll hear demonized down at the First Baptist Church or Assembly of God of Anytown is putting together a facial recognition database of all 312 million of you. The control grid ALREADY in place is so totalitarian in nature that it’s a joke that you think your vote even matters.
“Researchers also are looking at the way we walk and even at human buttocks as possible unique identifiers for the future.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/06/facial-recognition-technology_n_1257382.html
Reply »
Susan's Comb says:
Funny how all those articles are popping up about how the Ron Paul family is cashing in on his campaign. Scummy, scummy, sleazy, sleazy. I guess nepotism is okay even with libertarian nut jobs.
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
March 29th, 2012 at 11:48 pm
Yes, it is nepotism. So what? I guarantee you that are actually doing work and are upfront about the salaries, benefits.
Compared to most political, non-working, suck off the tit, nepotism.
Reply »
I. P. Shiner says:
When not on the march for Ron Paul, you can always count on Morrow to talk about the work of Clint Peoples and Henry Marshall and all of that old Mac Wallace stuff. He’s like clockwork on this website, trying to kick up those old theories.
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
March 29th, 2012 at 11:55 pm
Lyndon Johnson was at the epicenter of the JFK assassination and he had a lot of help: from CIA/elements of military in the killing; from his good buddy Hoover and Allen Dulles in the cover up.
The case against Lyndon Johnson for the JFK assassination is getting stronger ever year. The KGB had concluded by 9/16/65 that Lyndon Johnson was behind the JFK Assassination.
http://www.indiana.edu/~oah/nl/98feb/jfk.html#d1
Hoover sent a memo on 12/1/66 informing LBJ of this.
This is one of the jewels produced by the ARRB: a memo from J. Edgar Hoover dated 12/1/66 (and sent to LBJ on that day) which stated that as of September, 1965 the Soviets were telling their KGB agents in America that they had concluded that Lyndon Johnson was behind the JFK assassination.
Here is what FBI counterintelligence (probably by electronic monitoring) discovered:
“On September 16, 1965, this same source reported that the KGB Residency in New York City received instructions approximately September 16, 1965, from KGB headquarters in Moscow to develop all possible information concerning President Lyndon B. Johnson’s character, background, personal friends, family, and from which quarters he derives his support in his position as President of the United States. Our source added that in the instructions from Moscow, it was indicated that “now” the KGB was in possession of data purporting to indicate President Johnson was responsible for the assassination of the late President John F. Kennedy. KGB headquarters indicated that in view of this information, it was necessary for the Soviet Government to know the existing personal relationship between President Johnson and the Kennedy family, particularly between President Johnson and Robert and “Ted” Kennedy.”
Reply »
Blue says:
I have a sneaking suspicion the DC Circuit will grant preclearance to save preclearance. Another black eye for Holder.
Reply »
Blue Dogs Reply:
March 30th, 2012 at 10:46 am
Blue, President Obama will run against the Supreme Court this fall.
Reply »
Bob Lee Reply:
March 30th, 2012 at 2:02 pm
And has a good chance of winning by doing so. Outside of the core south there is not much sympathy for the hard right. And the court is hard right.
Reply »
Blue Reply:
March 30th, 2012 at 3:36 pm
Run against the Supreme Court striking down a deeply unpopular law.
Good luck with that.
Reply »
anita Reply:
March 31st, 2012 at 11:12 am
The “deeply unpopular law” you refer to actually polls on a whole with Americans evenly split — and some aspects of it are wildly popular. If the Court, which is seen as overtly partisan, strikes down the full act, Republicans will have to explain why they oppose allowing children to remain on their parent’s policies, and why they want to deny coverage for Americans with pre-existing conditions. That’s a loser general election issue for Republicans, especially with their nominee hamstrung by his history with the Massachusetts act.
Reply »
anita says:
Sounds like the Texas Supreme Court has affirmed their previous ruling on the Open Beaches Act.
Pathetic. What a waste of nine good robes. Wake me up when we get some sane leadership in this state.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
March 31st, 2012 at 5:52 am
After losing every election in site in 2010, democrats took to the courts to try to legislate.
Now after losing every lawsuit filed, its time for dems to play the violence card.
Time for dems to riot this summer.
Reply »
LL42's SuperPac says:
I wouldn’t wear those robes to a dog fight.
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks says:
Texas has a Democratic Party. Texas has a Democratic Convention. We just have a majority of citizens that are currently voting Republican in the state.
Reply »
TruthBtold says:
Democrats claim to be for the minority but the dark secret they don’t want you to know is that the black caucus and hispanic caucus switch off being vicechairman of the party, but never chairman. Only now that Hispanics have fled the democratic party in what will be called the mass exodus of the 21st century are Democrats allowing a hispanic to be the face of the Party.
Too late the boat has already left. Hispanics favor Voter ID and want an end to political corruption by politiquerras cartel money and party bosses. Texas can’t be pushing a discriminatory agenda if the race in question favors these laws and already have a seat at the table!
Reply »
anita says:
Truthbtold — April Fool’s Day is not until tomorrow.
Texas Democrats have stood on principle even when it has resulted in election losses cycle after cycle. They are on the cusp of electing an accomplished civil rights attorney and former judge as their party chairman — the first major party in Texas to be led by a Hispanic. And you have a problem with this?
Reply »
TruthBtold Reply:
March 31st, 2012 at 12:26 pm
Too late why has the Democratic Party not allowed the hispanic caucus to have a chairmanship role until now. 100 years later they decide to throw the mexicans a bone?
The Democratic Party is in shambles, allowing an alleged cartel (Robert Maldonado)member caught with a million dollars in his trunk to run along side the next party chairman. Corruption at the highest levels of party structure to stoop down to the lowest point in Democratic Party history.
Reply »
TruthBtold Reply:
March 31st, 2012 at 12:49 pm
Who does the mexican cartel members want to win? The 99% Democratically controlled South Texas or the Republican Party that wants oversight and a two party system? Hmmmm?
Reply »
TruthBtold says:
Here is the article of South Texas Democratic Party’s money man. Why would they allow him to continue to run? Let’s make an educated guess..
http://m.themonitor.com/articles/constable-58776-trooper-election.html
Reply »
anita says:
Ridiculous — he’s under felony indictment, he can’t even legally run. And what’s his connection to the lawyer running for Chairman of the Texas Democratic Party? None. I guess you think one Hispanic equals all Hispanics, right?
Reply »
TruthBtold says:
Ohh he is still running Anita. What is his connection to Democratic Party chairman candidate Hinojosa? How about 20 miles.. have you heard anything from him or TDP removing him from the ballot or distancing him from the cartel ties? Nope, seems they welcome the money and protection in the deep South Texas. I pray for oversight and protection from these dark days of the TDP history.
Reply »