Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
California to register illegal aliens to vote – automatically
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dave70968" data-source="post: 3074799" data-attributes="member: 13624"><p>From the article: "...when the state complies with a court order.... Signed into law in October 2015...." There appears to have been another bill passed in 2017 amending the 2015 law (which set a deadline of 2020); for the text, see <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB1407" target="_blank">https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB1407</a> . Note also the second paragraph of the Legislative Digest: Ergo, the DMV must represent to the SoS that the person met the requirements in the same way he would have if he'd filled out a registration card at the DMV (as has been implemented in federal law against all states since 1993).</p><p></p><p></p><p>1) See the California Constitution, Article II, Section 2: "A <strong>United States citizen</strong> 18 years of age and resident in this State may vote [emphasis added]." Source: <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=CONS&division&title&part&chapter&article=II" target="_blank">https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=CONS&division&title&part&chapter&article=II</a> Nothing in there about "allowing illegals to vote" in any election, let alone national ones. See also particularly the bill in question, amending Section 2263, (b)(2)(d): "<span style="color: #b30000"><strong>The department shall not electronically provide records of a person who applies for or is issued a driver’s license pursuant to Section 12801.9 of the Vehicle Code because he or she is unable to submit satisfactory proof that his or her presence in the United States is authorized under federal law</strong></span> [<span style="color: #b30000"><strong>emphasis</strong></span> mine, color to really call your attention to it above anything else here]." This <em>directly</em> addresses your concern about illegals, and prohibits the DMV from registering anybody as a voter who can't prove his authorization to be in the US.</p><p></p><p>2) The people have no standing to file a suit, class-action or not. Numerous cases have held that individuals don't have standing on behalf of "all citizens." See <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_(law)" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_(law)</a> for a general explanation, notably this passage: See also the section at <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_(law)#Taxpayer_standing" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_(law)#Taxpayer_standing</a>, which addresses an analogous situation (taxpayer standing vs. citizen or voter standing, but the principle is the same); it has links to some specific cases.</p><p></p><p>3) As to the <em>practical</em> effect of a suit, if California is willing to act in disregard to the law, do you really think an injunction is going to make a difference? <em>I'm</em> not aware of any provision in law that allows fed.gov to disregard the outcome of a state election for the House or the Senate, and there's no requirement for a Presidential election <em>at all</em> (see US Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 1: "Each State shall appoint, <strong>in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct</strong>, a Number of Electors..." [emphasis mine]); while the California legislature may have directed a public election with a winner-take-all outcome, that could easily be changed to outright selection <em>by</em> the legislature (as many states did in the beginning of our country).</p><p></p><p>4) And while we're on practicalities, consider the following:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">California has one of the lowest rates of eligible voter registration in the country.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">If people can't be bothered to fill out a registration card while they're already at the DMV, do you really think they're going to take the time and effort to go out and vote on Election Day?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Electoral votes (for POTUS) are winner-take-all in California, and based on population, not registration numbers; even if 100% of the new registrations were to vote Democrat, it wouldn't change the POTUS outcome one whit.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Votes for senators are on a statewide basis; given that California hasn't had a Republican senator in over a quarter-century, do you really expect these new votes to change the balance of the US Senate?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Representatives' districts are based on population, not registration numbers; unless a bunch of these newly-registered voters were in Republican-stronghold districts, they're not going to change the balance of the US House, either.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">State elections? Screw 'em; the whole idea of independent states is to let them be the Great Experiment, to try different ideas amongst themselves. If California can't be an inspiration to the rest of us, then let it be a terrible warning by empirical example.</li> </ul></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dave70968, post: 3074799, member: 13624"] From the article: "...when the state complies with a court order.... Signed into law in October 2015...." There appears to have been another bill passed in 2017 amending the 2015 law (which set a deadline of 2020); for the text, see [URL]https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB1407[/URL] . Note also the second paragraph of the Legislative Digest: Ergo, the DMV must represent to the SoS that the person met the requirements in the same way he would have if he'd filled out a registration card at the DMV (as has been implemented in federal law against all states since 1993). 1) See the California Constitution, Article II, Section 2: "A [B]United States citizen[/B] 18 years of age and resident in this State may vote [emphasis added]." Source: [URL]https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=CONS&division&title&part&chapter&article=II[/URL] Nothing in there about "allowing illegals to vote" in any election, let alone national ones. See also particularly the bill in question, amending Section 2263, (b)(2)(d): "[COLOR=#b30000][B]The department shall not electronically provide records of a person who applies for or is issued a driver’s license pursuant to Section 12801.9 of the Vehicle Code because he or she is unable to submit satisfactory proof that his or her presence in the United States is authorized under federal law[/B][/COLOR] [[COLOR=#b30000][B]emphasis[/B][/COLOR] mine, color to really call your attention to it above anything else here]." This [I]directly[/I] addresses your concern about illegals, and prohibits the DMV from registering anybody as a voter who can't prove his authorization to be in the US. 2) The people have no standing to file a suit, class-action or not. Numerous cases have held that individuals don't have standing on behalf of "all citizens." See [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_(law)[/URL] for a general explanation, notably this passage: See also the section at [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_(law)#Taxpayer_standing[/URL], which addresses an analogous situation (taxpayer standing vs. citizen or voter standing, but the principle is the same); it has links to some specific cases. 3) As to the [I]practical[/I] effect of a suit, if California is willing to act in disregard to the law, do you really think an injunction is going to make a difference? [I]I'm[/I] not aware of any provision in law that allows fed.gov to disregard the outcome of a state election for the House or the Senate, and there's no requirement for a Presidential election [I]at all[/I] (see US Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 1: "Each State shall appoint, [B]in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct[/B], a Number of Electors..." [emphasis mine]); while the California legislature may have directed a public election with a winner-take-all outcome, that could easily be changed to outright selection [I]by[/I] the legislature (as many states did in the beginning of our country). 4) And while we're on practicalities, consider the following: [LIST] [*]California has one of the lowest rates of eligible voter registration in the country. [*]If people can't be bothered to fill out a registration card while they're already at the DMV, do you really think they're going to take the time and effort to go out and vote on Election Day? [*]Electoral votes (for POTUS) are winner-take-all in California, and based on population, not registration numbers; even if 100% of the new registrations were to vote Democrat, it wouldn't change the POTUS outcome one whit. [*]Votes for senators are on a statewide basis; given that California hasn't had a Republican senator in over a quarter-century, do you really expect these new votes to change the balance of the US Senate? [*]Representatives' districts are based on population, not registration numbers; unless a bunch of these newly-registered voters were in Republican-stronghold districts, they're not going to change the balance of the US House, either. [*]State elections? Screw 'em; the whole idea of independent states is to let them be the Great Experiment, to try different ideas amongst themselves. If California can't be an inspiration to the rest of us, then let it be a terrible warning by empirical example. [/LIST] [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
California to register illegal aliens to vote – automatically
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom