NAVIGATION MAIN MENU

COMPENDIUM LIBRARY/TWITTER MONITOR
VIDEO GALLERY
Economic News
Newsbrief Archives
Democrat Leadership Twitter and Realtime Feeds
Cabinet twitter and realtime feeds
North America weblog
International weblog
Democrats twitter directory
Latest Government Jobs and Public Tenders
Jobs Matrix
Global Travel Information
Pop Entertainment Forum
Start Portal


Please make a donation to support upkeep of the daily news journal, back archives, twitter feeds and the compendium library.










Statement of Attorney General Eric Holder on Decision in Tex

Daily newsbrief journal for August 2012, also see http://www.usdemocrats.com/brief for a global 100-page perpetual brief and follow twitter @usdemocrats


Statement of Attorney General Eric Holder on Decision in Tex

Postby admin » Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:23 pm

Statement of Attorney General Eric Holder on Decision in Texas v. Holder

The Attorney General released the following statement on the ruling today in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Texas v. Holder, the state’s proposed voter ID law:

“The court’s decision today and the decision earlier this week on the Texas redistricting plans not only reaffirm - but help protect - the vital role the Voting Rights Act plays in our society to ensure that every American has the right to vote and to have that vote counted.

“The Department of Justice opposed preclearance of the Texas voter ID law because of the harm it would cause minority voters across the state of Texas. Under the proposed law, many of those without the required voter identification would be forced to travel great distances to get one – and some would have to pay for the documents they might need to do so. The legislature rejected reasonable efforts to mitigate these burdens. We are pleased with the court's decision to deny preclearance because of these racially discriminatory effects.

“The Justice Department’s efforts to uphold and enforce voting rights will remain aggressive and even-handed. When a jurisdiction meets its burden of proving that a proposed voting change would not have a racially discriminatory purpose or effect, the Department will not oppose that change -- when a jurisdiction fails to meet that burden, we will object.”
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 82092
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:00 am

Return to August 2012

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests