Clarence Thomas Casts Lone Vote Against Voting Rights Act


Clarence Thomas

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas

“The extensive pattern of discrimination that led the court to previously uphold Section 5 as enforcing the 15th Amendment [right to vote] no longer exists. Covered jurisdictions are not now engaged in a systematic campaign to deny Black citizens access to the ballot through intimidation and violence.”  So says Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.  If you translate or breakdown Justice Thomas’ quote, he is saying that Black voters no longer need voting protections.

Oh really! Hmmm.

The Supreme Court could have gutted the Voting Rights Act by overturning a provision that is used for enforcement.  However, the remaining justices disagreed with Thomas and  voted to preserve that provision.  The act allows states to apply to a court for an end to Justice Department oversight of the state’s voting rules. The justices said that bailout option must also be available to smaller jurisdictions.

Author and political analyst Earl Ofari Hutchinson has a commentary worth reading with our friends at The Daily Voice.comClick here to check out Mr. Hutchinson’s commentary.

So what do you think?  Is Clarence Thomas trying to establish himself as an independent voter?  Do you think he believes there is no need to protect black voters from intimidation?

No doubt that conditions for black people have improved dramatically over the past 5 decades.  However, it wasn’t that long ago when Jena, Louisiana black students wanted to hang out in the Whites Only section of the school playground and were greeted with nooses hanging from the tree.  Where I come from that’s called INTIMIDATION.

What do you think about Clarence Thomas’ position on the Voting Rights Act

Advertisements

7 Responses to “Clarence Thomas Casts Lone Vote Against Voting Rights Act”

  1. I think Justice Thomas is being narrow minded and sighted. African-Americans are no longer considered the majority minority in this country. Latinos, although Latino is not a race, are predicted to eventually become the majority in this country. For that type of major change to take place in this country, the government will need to continue to protect the democracy of this country.

    And, old habits die hard.

  2. Andrew K Says:

    Is insanity a means by which a Justice can be removed?

  3. Voice of Reason Says:

    So if they do away with the Voting Rights Act, how can enforcement be acheived? Say a state decides to buck the norm and cause problems for minority voters. Do you think the Federal Government will sanction said state?

  4. erafael Says:

    I feel that Clarence Thomas is a member of the Supreme Court that needs personal counseling to deal with the hatred of his own race. He is making up for some real or imagined grief and his mental illness is personified by enshrining his own silence. We need a Justice with teachability and who is able to dialogue, not stoicism and glorying in being able to grunt at the largest table in the land. He is trying to destroy years of progress through race sabotage to deal with childhood hurts.

  5. Who this uncle tom want to please ?

  6. RRIIGGHHTT Says:

    WOW!!! I thought I naver would see a black man against the voting right act. Well in a way I am to because I think it should be a law but other than that im fine with it…

  7. RRIIGGHHTT Says:

    BTW we do need protection because if we don’t have it then we just may end up in the white man’s farm workin without pay, and a wip on your back!!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: