“If a state refuses to turn their absentee voter list over to the federal government, will the Postal Service still mail their ballots under this proposal rule?” Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), the committee’s top Democrat, asked Steiner.
“Under our proposed regulation, no,” Steiner replied.
Does the constitution say that states must turn over absentee voter data in order to vote?
No, but the US Supreme Court will probably rule that nobody has standing to challenge presidential extortion like this as long as it’s done for racist reasons.
No, the Constitution does say States run their own elections. Feds can legislate times and dates and some stuff, but they have no legal authority to do this.
This was the condition that allowed the states to federate in the first place. If we were to place as much importance on this as the States did before federation, the breaking of this contract would be returned in kind by no longest submitting to the Federal government’s authority or pocket book.
We really need to stop saying shit like this.
The Constitution does not matter. Until conservatives, specifically Trump, are stopped, they are going to be fascists.
I’d put it differently. The Constitution is not self-enforcing. It doesn’t have magic powers. That’s why corrupt office-holders must be removed.
And if the corrective provisions to do that within the system are blocked, the people have to take appropriate and proportionate measures, as Jefferson and other founders wrote about.
That not a good reason to stop citing the constitution. The moment people stop doing that, then it’s completely over. It’s still beneficial to point it out so that people are genuinely aware. Also, federal judges have been shooting down Trump a lot recently. So yea, it does still matter.
We need to maintain the stance that the rules still exist and matter. They aren’t being enforced, but if we hold on to them we can demand they get enforced in the future
Exactly this. If there’s any chance to right this ship, the constitution has to be part of the core of it. Now that old document definitely needs updated, but saying the constitution doesn’t matter throws away all defense for the 1st and most important amendment. It’s already been trampled on in some states, hence the comments saying the constitution doesn’t matter, but conceding on the point of it mattering means conceding the fight.
It’s not protecting us, it’s a device to control us. The illusion of freedom let’s them dog walk us. Maybe J6 fund got vetoed, palestine was still flattened along with a bunch of school girls using our taxes.
So we’re supposed to not mention the constitution in order to stop conservatives? I would say make it make sense but it wouldn’t be possible for it to make sense.
Nope, actually it says that states get to run and regulate their own elections.
Genuine question: Does it say that the federal post office cannot filter the mail? Or that state rules for delivering specific kinds of mail the federal post must abide?
Earlier this year the Supreme Court just happened to rule that USPS can’t be sued for not delivering mail.
A divided Supreme Court sided with the federal government on Tuesday in U.S. Postal Service v. Konan, a dispute over mishandled mail. Writing for a 5-4 majority, Justice Clarence Thomas explained that a law protecting the U.S. Postal Service from lawsuits over lost or miscarried mail bars lawsuits over mail that was intentionally misdelivered.
On Tuesday, the court sided with the government, holding that an intentional failure to deliver the mail falls within the FTCA’s postal exception. The ordinary meanings of both “miscarriage” and “loss” point the court to this conclusion, wrote Thomas in the majority opinion. “Because a ‘miscarriage’ includes any failure of mail to arrive properly, a person experiences a miscarriage of mail when his mail is delivered to his neighbor, held at the post office, or returned to the sender—regardless of why it happened,” he wrote. Similarly, “[w]hen Congress enacted the FTCA, the ‘loss’ of mail ordinarily meant a deprivation of mail, regardless of how the deprivation was brought about.”
It’s illegal. Postmaster should be removed.
Arrested
Hanged.
Go postal?
No more federal taxes paid then. They’re breaking the constitution with corruption
@billbasher @santa I’ve been seriously wondering about this because after this year, we’re going to get hit hard … f’ing balling room, arc de failure, war …
If anyone is wondering how to do it, just tell your HR not to withhold federal income tax. Consequences can be large but if enough people do it they can’t audit everyone. I’d rather have it done at the state level. Like the fed has withheld benefits from my state blue and red parties so it’d be pretty easy to withhold and say ‘we are owed this’
@billbasher No HR. This is between our CPA (or not :) ) and us. With protestors being tossed in jail in TX for a lifetime our lives are getting smaller and weighing risks got bigger.
I agree completely about seeing it done at the state level and evil has a was of getting around the nicer things in life.
One more reason to drop the ballot in a drop box if one is available to you.
I’ve been voting absentee for years and have never returned it through the post.
It’s the other direction. The ballot won’t get to you to drop off.
States such as Washington allow you to print your ballot if it doesn’t arrive in time.
Fucking scum.
Use ballot drop boxes instead.
Use ballot drop boxes instead.
Weren’t tRump supporters burning them last go around?
I mean, one or two, yes. But there are thousands of them, and now they have improved fire resistance because of those fires.
Sure, but how are you getting your ballot?
WA state allows you to print your ballot if it doesn’t arrive in time. I’m sure other states do as well.
The fix is in.
Kill 'em all.
The Hill is a little behind on this one. The court just struck down the EO and said postal service must continue to deliver ballots. In the article, Steiner claims he’s going to follow whatever the court decides, so let’s hope that’s the case.
They’ll deliver them late.
IDK what we’re going to do in Oregon :( that’s the only way we can vote.
States need to create a system where the ballots are mailed in a plain manila envelope, then.
Oh, guys there’s a correction coming in… No, they didn’t *back. What they meant was *black. Big big difference. Theyre holding black people’s vote, they’re holding, Latino and Hispanic and Asian votes. Don’t worry, they’re not holding back the vote. That’s crazy talk!
So mail it in unmarked envelopes. Are you going to try to hold all mail for everyone? Or hold it to specific addresses?
Or hold it to specific addresses?
This sounds easiest
The Fuckery Advances
Florida is like the shining example that blows up their narrative. It has a successful mail in ballot program. And it’s also been under Republican control some 3 decades.
Florida also sucks tRump off, so they’re probably first in line to share voter data
Maybe. But that wasn’t my point.
