Select Page

Federal Judge Rules, No Checking Citizenship To Vote

Federal Judge Rules, No Checking Citizenship To Vote

We have seen the Liberal Left now pushing since the last elections to allow illegals a voice in our elections, they claim if they are paying taxes they should be allowed to vote, but this is just a smoke screen, what they really need are new voters because the ones that used to support them are rapidly seeing them for what they are.

Three months ago I wrote an article The Left’s Next Move, Demand Illegals Be Allowed To Vote, sadly what I wrote in that article seems to be accelerating as the left is realizing without new voters they will continue to lose elections because the majority of Americans see they are without a message, other than returning us to the way we were under Obama and their hatred of Trump.

A Federal Judge on Monday, June 18th ruled that Kansas could not demand proof of citizenship of people registering to vote, U.S. District Judge Julie Robinson said it would cause undue hardship for people to register to vote, she also added that all should have a voice in federal elections.

Kris Kobach, who is an advocate of making sure elections are conducted within a legal manner, to make sure no illegal voters are casting a vote said he found such a ruling incorrect, “It is inconsistent with precedents of the U.S. Supreme Court,” he issued in a statement concerning the ruling.

The lead case filed by the ACLU on behalf of several named voters and the League of Women Voters is centered on the National Voter Registration Act, commonly known as the Motor Voter Law, which allows people to register to vote when applying for a driver’s license, as is stated in the New York Times.

In an extraordinary rebuke, the judge also ordered Kobach on Monday to complete an additional six hours of legal education on top of other requirements before he can renew his law license for the upcoming year.

I have to add, the Judge may wish to apply this to herself, seems she forgot the part of the constitution that states:

Amendment 15 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Amendment 19 The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Amendment 24 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

(For a history of why the 24th Amendment only applies to federal elections, see here).

Amendment 26 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

Seems this judge, like most activist judges, forgot it is not the legal right of any illegal migrant to vote in any of our elections.

See the source image

Indeed, other than the voting provisions, the Constitution only uses the term citizen to define the qualifications for the House of Representatives, the Senate, the Presidency, guarantee of Privileges and Immunities (Article IV), the 11th Amendment (“citizens of another state”), and the 14th Amendment (naturalization and “privileges or immunities”). There is a fallacy that the constitution favors not any less a citizen or none citizen, but I beg to differ, the constitution mentions only citizens, never mentions any place a word about none citizens.

“It also may have the inadvertent effect of eroding, instead of maintaining confidence in the electoral system given the confusing, evolving, and inconsistent enforcement of (documentary proof of citizenship) laws since 2013,” she wrote.

The ruling was received by the ACLU with open arms, they have openly spoken about their desire to allow illegals to vote.

“This decision is a stinging rebuke of Kris Kobach, and the centerpiece of his voter suppression efforts: a show-me-your-papers law that has disenfranchised tens of thousands of Kansans,” Dale Ho, director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, said in news release. “That law was based on a xenophobic lie that noncitizens are engaged in rampant election fraud.”

The reality is people like Dale Ho wish illegals could vote, this is just another attack by the ACLU that has worked to subvert the constitution and rule of law that is not in line with liberal ideology.

While the left is realizing that they are losing their constituents at an alarming rate, and after taking blacks for granted for years, they are also finding that both Blacks and Hispanics voted for Trump with much larger numbers then they have voted for any GOP member since the days prior to Roosevelt.

What is always surprising to me, the DNC until 1928 would not even allow an African American to register as a DNC voter, nor could they attend any of their conventions, the GOP never had such an issue with this. We now have a revisionist history taught that the they freed the slaves, gave women’s suffrage and brought African Americans into the ranks of equality, nothing could be further from the truth, the GOP did this, not the DNC.

What does polling show?

While I see moves from activist judges trying to change this, I think in the end this could very well come down to voting, so what do polls show in regards to American perception of this?

There has been a push by the left to allow illegals to vote, this has grown in volume since the 2016 elections. In a recent poll that asked these four questions:

  1. Should voters be required to show photo identification such as a driver’s license before being allowed to vote?

  2. Should illegal immigrants be allowed to vote if they can prove that they live in this country and pay taxes?

  3. The size of legislative districts for state voting purposes are determined by the number of people living in them. In setting the size of these districts, should states count only eligible voters or all residents including illegal immigrants?

  4. Which happens more often—that people are prevented from voting who should be allowed to vote or that people are allowed to vote who are not eligible to vote?

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that one-out-of-three Likely U.S. Voters (35%) now believes that illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote if they can prove they live in this country and pay taxes. Sixty percent (60%) disagree, while five percent (5%) are undecided

Fifty-three percent (53%) of Democrats think tax-paying illegal immigrants should have the right to vote. Twenty-one percent (21%) of Republicans and 30% of voters not affiliated with either major political party agree.

Sixty-six percent (66%) of voters agree with the legal challenge and say states should only count eligible voters when setting the size of legislative districts for voting purposes. Just 23% favor the current system in Texas that counts all residents including illegal immigrants. Eleven percent (11%) are not sure.

This last part brings up the question, should illegals be counted when districts are drawn up and representatives are elected? I say now, a representative is elected by citizens to represent him/her, illegals should have no voice, they should not be here to start with, giving them a voice will drown out the voice of actual citizens.

But there is more, to ensure democratic control in states, we now see Democrats introducing bills to allow none citizens to vote in local and state elections.

We need to stop this, if you are not supposed to be here to start with, why would you be allowed to have a voice in the affairs of people that do? We need to get out in November, make sure we vote for people who think the law, our borders are something to be held as sacred, if you don’t wish to support this, and there are Democrats and Republicans that feel this way, maybe we should see to it that they find another profession.

About The Author

Timothy Benton

Student of history, a journalist for the last 2 years. Specialize in Middle East History, more specifically modern history with the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Also, a political commentator has been a lifetime fan of politics.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *