evince
Truthmatters
lets discuss the cold hard evidence the court records display
Trump was RIGHT! The system is rigged.
- Thread starter PoliTalker
- Start date
lets discuss the cold hard evidence the court records display
evince
Truthmatters
what debate?
Bernie used the Democratic party
he was never a Dem
Bernie also USED the Russian lies to attack Hilary
he has known her for decades
he knew they were lies
evince
Truthmatters
Voting Rights & Elections
Voting is the foundation of our democracy. The Brennan Center is at the center of the fight to preserve and expand the right to vote for every eligible citizen. Through practical policy proposals, litigation, advocacy, and communications, the Brennan Center works to ensure that voting is free, fair, and accessible for all Americans. The Center’s signature proposal, automatic voter registration, would save money, increase accuracy and participation — and add an additional 50 million voters to the rolls permanently.
evince
Truthmatters
Recent Research
50 State Guide to Redistricting
Brennan Center for Justice
Once a decade, every state redraws the district lines governing where members of Congress and state legislators are elected. This state by state guide shows how redistricting happens across the U.S.
June 21, 2018RedistrictingRedistricting Reform Resource Center
Testimony Supporting Risk Limiting Audits in Ohio
Liz Howard
The Brennan Center submitted testimony before the Ohio Senate Government Oversight and Reform Committee in support of Senate Bill 256, which would mandate Risk Limiting Audits throughout the state by 2020.
June 6, 2018Securing American Elections From Foreign Interference
View More Research
Recent Commentary
Mapping the Road Ahead for Partisan Gerrymandering Cases
Thomas Wolf
At least five gerrymandering cases in pivotal swing states could end up at the Supreme Court in coming terms.
June 29, 2018Redistricting
The State of Redistricting Litigation (Updated June 28, 2018 Edition)
Michael Li, Thomas Wolf, Alexis Farmer
A round up of where key redistricting cases across the country stand.
June 28, 2018RedistrictingGerrymandering at the Supreme Court
View More Commentary
Recent Litigation
Benisek v. Lamone
On May 20, the Brennan Center filed a brief supporting the plaintiffs' opposition to the motion to dismiss. The case was formerly known as Shapiro v. McManus.
June 29, 2018Redistricting
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, et al. v. Merrill, et al.
The NAACP and various members filed suit to challenge Connecticut’s 2011 state legislative maps, contending that the maps violate the Fourteenth Amendment because of prison gerrymandering.
June 28, 2018Redistricting
View More Litigation
http://www.brennancenter.org/issues/voting-rights-elections
50 State Guide to Redistricting
Brennan Center for Justice
Once a decade, every state redraws the district lines governing where members of Congress and state legislators are elected. This state by state guide shows how redistricting happens across the U.S.
June 21, 2018RedistrictingRedistricting Reform Resource Center
Testimony Supporting Risk Limiting Audits in Ohio
Liz Howard
The Brennan Center submitted testimony before the Ohio Senate Government Oversight and Reform Committee in support of Senate Bill 256, which would mandate Risk Limiting Audits throughout the state by 2020.
June 6, 2018Securing American Elections From Foreign Interference
View More Research
Recent Commentary
Mapping the Road Ahead for Partisan Gerrymandering Cases
Thomas Wolf
At least five gerrymandering cases in pivotal swing states could end up at the Supreme Court in coming terms.
June 29, 2018Redistricting
The State of Redistricting Litigation (Updated June 28, 2018 Edition)
Michael Li, Thomas Wolf, Alexis Farmer
A round up of where key redistricting cases across the country stand.
June 28, 2018RedistrictingGerrymandering at the Supreme Court
View More Commentary
Recent Litigation
Benisek v. Lamone
On May 20, the Brennan Center filed a brief supporting the plaintiffs' opposition to the motion to dismiss. The case was formerly known as Shapiro v. McManus.
June 29, 2018Redistricting
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, et al. v. Merrill, et al.
The NAACP and various members filed suit to challenge Connecticut’s 2011 state legislative maps, contending that the maps violate the Fourteenth Amendment because of prison gerrymandering.
June 28, 2018Redistricting
View More Litigation
http://www.brennancenter.org/issues/voting-rights-elections
evince
Truthmatters
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello evince,
I am here now. I do have a life outside of this place.
You are correct. Republicans suppress votes. They know that when there is a big turn out Democrats are more likely to win elections. Republicans want diminished turn-outs.
Republican Sec of States in FL and Georgia acted to purge legal voters from their rolls.
That's dirty politics. Shame on the Republicans for that.
I am here now. I do have a life outside of this place.
You are correct. Republicans suppress votes. They know that when there is a big turn out Democrats are more likely to win elections. Republicans want diminished turn-outs.
Republican Sec of States in FL and Georgia acted to purge legal voters from their rolls.
That's dirty politics. Shame on the Republicans for that.
For all its faults..that is absolutely true.
Don't sacrifice good in the name of perfection...or you end up with TRUMP
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
what concerns me is in 2008 the Dems had the congress and senate but took single payer or universal healthcare off the table because some corporatist democrats wanted it off the table
the system stinks to high heaven
evince
Truthmatters
because they didn't have the votes to pass it
evince
Truthmatters
https://www.brennancenter.org/legal-work/dnc-v-rnc-consent-decree
DNC v. RNC Consent Decree
November 5, 2016
In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree with their Democratic party counterparts. Under that decree and its 1987 successor, the Republican party organizations agreed to allow a federal court to review proposed “ballot security” programs, including any proposed voter caging.
The consent decree has been invoked several times, by the parties to the decree and by others. In late 2008, the Democratic National Committee and Obama for America sought to enforce the consent decree, claiming that the RNC had not submitted alleged ballot security operations for review. After the election, the RNC asked the federal court to vacate or substantially modify the decree. The court denied the RNC's motion to vacate the consent decree and ordered the decree remain in effect until December 2017. The RNC then appealed to the Third Circuit, which unanimously rejected the appeal and affirmed the District Court's decision. A subsequent petition for rehearing en banc by the full Third Circuit, and a certiorari petition to U.S. Supreme Court, were denied.
On October 26, 2016, the DNC filed a motion asking that the court find the RNC had violated the decree. On November 5, after abbreviated discovery, the district court denied the DNC’s request, ruling that the DNC had not provided sufficient evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the RNC on ballot-security operations, but will allow the DNC to offer further evidence after the election.
Click here to learn more about voter caging.
Click here to learn more about ballot security programs.
Related Court Documents
2016
Order Denying Request to Extend Decree (11/05/2016)
RNC's Memorandum in Opposition to Order to Show Cause (10/31/2016)
DNC's Memorandum in Support of Order to Show Cause (10/26/2016)
2012
Petition for Rehearing (03/22/2012)
Third Circuit Opinion (03/08/2012)
2009
Debevoise Order (12/01/2009)
Debevoise Opinion (12/01/2009)
RNC Post-Hearing Brief (06/26/2009)
DNC Post-Hearing Brief (06/26/2009)
RNC Reply Brief (02/19/2009)
DNC Brief Opposing Motion to Vacate (01/19/2009)
RNC Brief in Support of Motion (11/03/2008)
2008 (several states)
DNC Brief (11/03/2008)
DNC Brief Atty. Certification of Exhibits (11/03/2008)
OFA Intervention Memo (11/03/2008)
Minute Entry (11/03/2008)
2004 (Ohio)
Malone Dismissal (02/03/2005)
Malone en banc Decision (11/09/2004)
Malone Appellate Decision (11/01/2004)
Malone Order (11/01/2004)
Malone Intervenor PI brief (11/01/2004)
Malone Intervenor Complaint (10/31/2004)
Malone Memo in Support of Intervention (10/28/2004)
Malone Motion to Intervene (10/28/2004)
2004 (South Dakota)
Daschle Temporary Restraining Order (11/02/2004)
Daschle SD Complaint (11/01/2004)
2002 (New Jersey)
Order (10/31/2002)
1990 (North Carolina)
Order (11/05/1990)
1987 (several states)
Consent Decree (07/27/1987)
Original 1981 case (New Jersey)
Consent Decree (11/01/1982)
Complaint (02/11/1982)
DNC v. RNC Consent Decree
November 5, 2016
In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree with their Democratic party counterparts. Under that decree and its 1987 successor, the Republican party organizations agreed to allow a federal court to review proposed “ballot security” programs, including any proposed voter caging.
The consent decree has been invoked several times, by the parties to the decree and by others. In late 2008, the Democratic National Committee and Obama for America sought to enforce the consent decree, claiming that the RNC had not submitted alleged ballot security operations for review. After the election, the RNC asked the federal court to vacate or substantially modify the decree. The court denied the RNC's motion to vacate the consent decree and ordered the decree remain in effect until December 2017. The RNC then appealed to the Third Circuit, which unanimously rejected the appeal and affirmed the District Court's decision. A subsequent petition for rehearing en banc by the full Third Circuit, and a certiorari petition to U.S. Supreme Court, were denied.
On October 26, 2016, the DNC filed a motion asking that the court find the RNC had violated the decree. On November 5, after abbreviated discovery, the district court denied the DNC’s request, ruling that the DNC had not provided sufficient evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the RNC on ballot-security operations, but will allow the DNC to offer further evidence after the election.
Click here to learn more about voter caging.
Click here to learn more about ballot security programs.
Related Court Documents
2016
Order Denying Request to Extend Decree (11/05/2016)
RNC's Memorandum in Opposition to Order to Show Cause (10/31/2016)
DNC's Memorandum in Support of Order to Show Cause (10/26/2016)
2012
Petition for Rehearing (03/22/2012)
Third Circuit Opinion (03/08/2012)
2009
Debevoise Order (12/01/2009)
Debevoise Opinion (12/01/2009)
RNC Post-Hearing Brief (06/26/2009)
DNC Post-Hearing Brief (06/26/2009)
RNC Reply Brief (02/19/2009)
DNC Brief Opposing Motion to Vacate (01/19/2009)
RNC Brief in Support of Motion (11/03/2008)
2008 (several states)
DNC Brief (11/03/2008)
DNC Brief Atty. Certification of Exhibits (11/03/2008)
OFA Intervention Memo (11/03/2008)
Minute Entry (11/03/2008)
2004 (Ohio)
Malone Dismissal (02/03/2005)
Malone en banc Decision (11/09/2004)
Malone Appellate Decision (11/01/2004)
Malone Order (11/01/2004)
Malone Intervenor PI brief (11/01/2004)
Malone Intervenor Complaint (10/31/2004)
Malone Memo in Support of Intervention (10/28/2004)
Malone Motion to Intervene (10/28/2004)
2004 (South Dakota)
Daschle Temporary Restraining Order (11/02/2004)
Daschle SD Complaint (11/01/2004)
2002 (New Jersey)
Order (10/31/2002)
1990 (North Carolina)
Order (11/05/1990)
1987 (several states)
Consent Decree (07/27/1987)
Original 1981 case (New Jersey)
Consent Decree (11/01/1982)
Complaint (02/11/1982)
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello guno,
SO TRUE!
I was so pissed when Obama took the public option off the table.
The big powerful corporations have too much power. Big insurance dictated their terms to Obama: Either take the Public Option off the table or they would throw their funds against the PPACA. But if he did what they wanted, then they would drop millions into support. Obama caved. And the reason he did is because so many Dems are on the corporate take.
Democrat Sen Max Baucus was instrumental in shooting it down:
RIGGED!
SO TRUE!
I was so pissed when Obama took the public option off the table.
The big powerful corporations have too much power. Big insurance dictated their terms to Obama: Either take the Public Option off the table or they would throw their funds against the PPACA. But if he did what they wanted, then they would drop millions into support. Obama caved. And the reason he did is because so many Dems are on the corporate take.
Democrat Sen Max Baucus was instrumental in shooting it down:
RIGGED!
evince
Truthmatters
why did Bernie use the Russian lies?
the Russians targeted Bernie people just like they did the rightwing tards
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello evince,
They had the votes if they had all the Dems. Too many are on the corporate take.
They had the votes if they had all the Dems. Too many are on the corporate take.
evince
Truthmatters
http://www.newser.com/story/255694/sanders-says-russians-targeted-his-supporters.html
BERNIE FLAT OUT ADMITTS IT
BERNIE FLAT OUT ADMITTS IT