Federalizing The V**e: Goes against all that is good and actually is a diversion of the dimwitcrat suppression of b****s.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Goes against all that is good and actually is a diversion of the dimwitcrat suppression of b****s.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/civil-rights-leader-bob-woodson-biden-v****g-rights-bill

pendennis

For all the hoo-hah over this bill, it's likely it's unconstitutional on its face. The Constitution is very clear, in that e******n operations are left in the hands of the states.

I agree wholeheartedly that it shouldn't be passed; Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema shouldn't have to be considered mavericks, obstructionists, or what have you. It's 48 Dimms who need some remedial U.S. Constitution classes.

If, and a mighty big one at that, this bill were to pass, and be enacted, it will be in various Federal courts before the ink dries on the signature. And with a very conservative majority on the court...

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

pendennis wrote:

For all the hoo-hah over this bill, it's likely it... (show quote)

FrumCA

pendennis wrote:

For all the hoo-hah over this bill, it's likely it... (show quote)

I couldn't agree with you more.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

The framers were quite brilliant. Federalizing the v**e makes it easier to establish an autocracy (of some kind). And it increases the possibility of one party rule, as the v****g rights bill intends.The democrat sponsored v****g rights bill is the single most dangerous thing (to our republic) that has ever been proposed. If it passes and signed by the president it leads to a permanent democrat party rule and the end of our democratic republic. Pray, if you believe in prayer, that it fails

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

boberic wrote:

The framers were quite brilliant. Federalizing the v**e makes it easier to establish an autocracy (of some kind). And it increases the possibility of one party rule, as the v****g rights bill intends.The democrat sponsored v****g rights bill is the single most dangerous thing (to our republic) that has ever been proposed. If it passes and signed by the president it leads to a permanent democrat party rule and the end of our democratic republic. Pray, if you believe in prayer, that it fails

Well put.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

pendennis wrote:

For all the hoo-hah over this bill, it's likely it... (show quote)

Only problem is this is not a Very conservative majority on the court. I only count 4 very conservative Justices. And certain provisions of the Dem bill to suppress the Republican v**e could pass. Not to mention their attempt to create two new states.

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

Architect1776 wrote:

Goes against all that is good and actually is a diversion of the dimwitcrat suppression of b****s.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/civil-rights-leader-bob-woodson-biden-v****g-rights-bill

Please explain how passage of this bill “ federalizing the ??

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

DennyT wrote:

Please explain how passage of this bill “ federalizing the ??

Really? Are you actually asking this question?

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

Blurryeyed wrote:

Really? Are you actually asking this question?

Yes . Other than the passage on felons how is this federalizing e******ns ?
Explain please. I just read this entire thread and the linked article and there is not one shred of back up for that claim.
In fact that phrase is not even mentioned or discussed any where except in the headlines. That just proves to me people like you don’t read anything and just parrot headlines .

I would add anything taken from the Inghram is worthless and should never be labeled “news “ anymore than Maddie, hannity or tucker.

FrumCA

DennyT wrote:

Please explain how passage of this bill “ federalizing the ??

Seriously Denny?? Where have you been???

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

DennyT wrote:

Yes . Other than the passage on felons how is this federalizing e******ns ?
Explain please. I just read this entire thread and the linked article and there is not one shred of back up for that claim.
In fact that phrase is not even mentioned or discussed any where except in the headlines. That just proves to me people like you don’t read anything and just parrot headlines .

It is pretty much unclear as to which bill the lying democrats will consider, there are two bills each of those bills takes control away from the state legislatures and gives control to Congress, if you don't see that as federalizing e******ns, please explain to me what you would need to see to change your perspective.

HR1 is some 900 pages of every liberal wish list or e******n changes including a s**m to fleece the American tax payers in order to fund political campaigns.

How about you read it and tell us why you don't consider it to be nationalizing e******ns.

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

Blurryeyed wrote:

It is pretty much unclear as to which bill the lyi... (show quote)

A good non answer. I am not the one made the claim it federalized the e******n
I say bS .. back up the claim.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

DennyT wrote:

A good non answer. I am not the one made the claim it federalized the e******n
I say bS .. back up the claim.

Uh, I guess that you don't understand the part about Congress taking over the e******n laws from the state legislatures.... Does that need an explanation?

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

pendennis wrote:

For all the hoo-hah over this bill, it's likely it... (show quote)

That's not true, the law would be challenged but I am very unclear as to how it would be challenged because Article I, Section IV, Clause I reads as follows;

"The Times, Places and Manner of holding E******ns for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators."