The Scotus agrees the republican party cheats in elections

evince said:
“That evidence includes proof that the RNC violated the Decree in 1990 and in 2004, when it created voter challenge lists that targeted minority voters; that between 1997 and 2008, Republican candidates and party organizations had engaged in separate voter suppression activities in various states, including Texas, Arkansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin; and that the racially polarized voting that influenced the RNC in the 1980s persists today,” Angelo Genova wrote in his brief to the court.

“This substantial evidence stands in stark contrast to the RNC’s proffered ‘evidence,’ “ Mr. Genova added. He said the Republicans had made a “preposterous claim that because President Obama, Attorney General [Eric] Holder, and former RNC leaders Michael Steele and Boyd Rutherford are African-American, the RNC no longer has any incentive to suppress minority votes in violation of the terms of the Consent Decree.”

The case was Republican National Committee v. Democratic National Committee (12-373).


http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justic...rieve-for-GOP-in-voting-rights-consent-decree
Click to expand...

your a lying idiot
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_New_Hampshire_Senate_election_phone_jamming_scandal



2002 New Hampshire Senate election phone jamming scandal




The 2002 New Hampshire Senate election phone jamming scandal involves the use of a telemarketing firm hired by that state's Republican Party (NHGOP) for election tampering. The tampering involved using a call center to jam the phone lines of a Get Out the Vote (GOTV) operation. In the end, 900 calls were made for 45 minutes of disruption to the Democratic-leaning call centers.

During that state's 2002 election for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Robert C. Smith, the NHGOP hired GOP Marketplace, based in Northern Virginia, to jam another phone bank being used by the state Democratic Party and the firefighters' union for efforts to turn out voters on behalf of then-governor Jeanne Shaheen on Election Day. John E. Sununu, the Republican candidate, won a narrow victory. In addition to criminal prosecutions, disclosures in the case have come from a civil suit filed by the state's Democratic Party against the state's Republican Party (now settled).

Four men have been convicted of, or pled guilty to, federal crimes and sentenced to prison for their involvement as of 2008. One conviction has been reversed by an appeals court, a decision prosecutors are appealing. James Tobin, freed on appeal, was later indicted on charges of lying to the FBI during the original investigation.
 
you on the right will ALL lie about this and continue to vote for the party that keeps doing it.

your traitors to this country
 
evince said:
your a lying idiot
Click to expand...

don't you understand the article at all....

Yeah, the DNC lawyers present "evidence"....in real world language, thats allegations...bullshit....evidence manufactured by the DNC.....
=====================================================================================================
Republican National Committee v. Democratic National Committee

Petition for certiorari denied on January 14, 2013
12-3733d Cir. N/A N/A N/AN/AOT 2012



Issue: (1) Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit misinterpreted United States v. Munsingwear, and thus improperly relied on the district court’s factual findings and legal rulings in an earlier case that was vacated as moot while on appeal, even though other courts of appeals have interpreted Munsingwear as rendering a vacated decision a nullity, as if it the case had never been filed, and draining its factual findings of all vitality; (2) whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit misconstrued Rule 60(b)(5) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as this Court has interpreted that rule in Board of Education of Oklahoma City Public Schools v. Dowell and Rufo v. Inmates of Suffolk County Jail by deeming substantial compliance with a consent decree over more than two decades insufficient to justify termination, even though other courts of appeals have held that the defendant’s good faith and substantial compliance with a decree over a long period of time is a ground, standing alone, for terminating the decree; and (3) whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit misconstrued Rule 60(b)(5) by affirming the district court’s unilateral expansion of the decree, even though other courts of appeals have held that the rule does not authorize a court to increase the obligations imposed by a decree.
[TABLE="class: dates_n_proceedings"]
[TR]
DateProceedings and Orders[/TR]
[TR="class: color0"]
[TD]Jul 13 2012[/TD]
[TD]Application (12A53) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from July 26, 2012 to September 24, 2012, submitted to Justice Alito.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: color0"]
[TD]Jul 17 2012[/TD]
[TD]Application (12A53) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until September 24, 2012.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: color0"]
[TD]Sep 21 2012[/TD]
[TD]Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 25, 2012)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: color0"]
[TD]Oct 5 2012[/TD]
[TD]Order extending time to file response to petition to and including December 5, 2012.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: color0"]
[TD]Oct 25 2012[/TD]
[TD]Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Colorado Republican Committee.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: color0"]
[TD]Oct 25 2012[/TD]
[TD]Brief amicus curiae of Republican Party of Wisconsin filed.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: color0"]
[TD]Dec 5 2012[/TD]
[TD]Brief of respondent Democratic National Committee in opposition filed.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: color0"]
[TD]Dec 17 2012[/TD]
[TD]Reply of petitioner Republican National Committee filed.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: color0"]
[TD]Dec 19 2012[/TD]
[TD]DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 11, 2013.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: color0"]
[TD]Jan 14 2013[/TD]
[TD]Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Colorado Republican Committee GRANTED.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: color0"]
[TD]Jan 14 2013[/TD]
[TD]Petition DENIED.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
 
then why didn't the SCOTUS give them relief if it was all untrue?


because of the evidence you lying sack of shit
 
the evidence has been presented to judge after judge and every one who sees it says PUNISH THEM SOME MORE!
 
evince said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_New_Hampshire_Senate_election_phone_jamming_scandal



2002 New Hampshire Senate election phone jamming scandal




The 2002 New Hampshire Senate election phone jamming scandal involves the use of a telemarketing firm hired by that state's Republican Party (NHGOP) for election tampering. The tampering involved using a call center to jam the phone lines of a Get Out the Vote (GOTV) operation. In the end, 900 calls were made for 45 minutes of disruption to the Democratic-leaning call centers.

During that state's 2002 election for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Robert C. Smith, the NHGOP hired GOP Marketplace, based in Northern Virginia, to jam another phone bank being used by the state Democratic Party and the firefighters' union for efforts to turn out voters on behalf of then-governor Jeanne Shaheen on Election Day. John E. Sununu, the Republican candidate, won a narrow victory. In addition to criminal prosecutions, disclosures in the case have come from a civil suit filed by the state's Democratic Party against the state's Republican Party (now settled).

Four men have been convicted of, or pled guilty to, federal crimes and sentenced to prison for their involvement as of 2008. One conviction has been reversed by an appeals court, a decision prosecutors are appealing. James Tobin, freed on appeal, was later indicted on charges of lying to the FBI during the original investigation.
Click to expand...



was this a lie?

its wasn't a city council race
 
The Supreme Court on Monday declined the Republican National Committee's request to lift a three-decade-old court order that limits the national GOP's ability to challenge voters' eligibility at the polls.
The RNC appealed, saying that its decades-long compliance and good faith should justify ending the consent decree.

In deciding the case, which stems from a 2008 lawsuit brought by the DNC, the district court clarified ballot security efforts as “any program aimed at combating voter fraud by preventing potential voters from registering to vote or casting a ballot,” and upheld the consent decree while adding a Dec. 1, 2017, expiration date.


The Third Circuit upheld the district court’s decision and modification, saying that just because the RNC had largely complied with the order, the “mere passage of time” does not count as a change of facts that would warrant lifting the order.

The Supreme Court, as is customary, did not offer an explanation for declining to hear the RNC's petition.

http://tinyurl.com/lknn94x


The consent decree you've been babbling about for weeks DISAPPEARS 12/1/2017.....lmao
 
NOVA said:
The Supreme Court on Monday declined the Republican National Committee's request to lift a three-decade-old court order that limits the national GOP's ability to challenge voters' eligibility at the polls.
The RNC appealed, saying that its decades-long compliance and good faith should justify ending the consent decree.

In deciding the case, which stems from a 2008 lawsuit brought by the DNC, the district court clarified ballot security efforts as “any program aimed at combating voter fraud by preventing potential voters from registering to vote or casting a ballot,” and upheld the consent decree while adding a Dec. 1, 2017, expiration date.


The Third Circuit upheld the district court’s decision and modification, saying that just because the RNC had largely complied with the order, the “mere passage of time” does not count as a change of facts that would warrant lifting the order.

The Supreme Court, as is customary, did not offer an explanation for declining to hear the RNC's petition.

http://tinyurl.com/lknn94x


The consent decree you've been babbling about for weeks DISAPPEARS 12/1/2017.....lmao
Click to expand...





welcomed the high court's action.

"The Supreme Court, in denying a writ of certiorari in this case, reaffirms the vital necessity of the original consent decree," Genova said in a statement. "The order remains integral to enforcing critical protections against minority voter suppression throughout our nation, protections that as are important today as they were thirty years ago."
 
evince said:
your party cheats and the scotus agrees
Click to expand...


Thats bullshit....lying about where you live on your registration is cheating.....and all the SC did was prevent the GOP from verifying the information....which really
is the federal govs. job in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top