They’re asking election administrators to use their data to purge voter registrations, which means names could be removed in a less public process than a formal voter challenge. The strategy could mean electors won’t be summoned in advance to defend their voting rights and the identities of those seeking to purge voters might not be routinely public.
Which Constitution says that? Not the US Constitution, the word “challenge” doesn’t appear there at all. And not in the section of the Georgia State constitution regarding voting, either. Is there a secret MAGA Constitution which only they know about, but applies to everyone? That might explain some of the recent SCOTUS shenanigans.
Supreme Court Justice ducks under the desk with a crayon…
Oh hey look there it is! Right there in the constitution.
“Talking a lot of shit for someone within Official Act distance” - Joe Biden (in my dreams)
You joke, but I have always thought that the reason why the modern Conservative movement leans so heavily on the Founders is that they want to call a constitutional convention to rewrite the whole thing from scratch, and become the new Founders who courts 200+ years from now have to defer to.
That would be a hell of a trick when over 60% of the country doesn’t agree.
Prepare to be tricked. They need 34 states to call a new convention, and already have 28
https://www.commoncause.org/our-work/constitution-courts-and-democracy-issues/article-v-convention/
Well, shit.
And with the way education is going in this country, it will not be long before they can convince everyone that 34 is less than 28.
60% of the population disagrees, yes. However…
So, 34 red state legislatures can propose an amendment. To be ratified, it requires 3/4 of the states (38 out of 50) to ratify it.
For either of those steps, I’m not sure if the citizens of those states have any say in the matter or if the legislatures can do it all themselves (plus or minus any veto from the governor of those states or legislative overrides of those).
So, they need 34 states to propose an amendment and 38 to pass it. As some else in this thread said, they already have 28.
Damn, gerrymandering is dangerous AF
Definitely. But there’s also disproportionate representation at play.
Let’s say there’s a mass exodus from the shittiest of shithole states leaving only, say, 100 people. For sake of argument, that’s sufficient for the state to continue existing and with a state government.
That 100 person state still gets two US Senators and (at minimum) one House rep (technically, it retains as many reps as it had as of the last census up until the next census in 2030). It also qualifies to be one of the required 34/38 states to call for a constitutional convention as well as vote to ratify the proposed amendment.
So, the takeaway is that all elections matter. Get out and vote every opportunity, and vote for sane people who aren’t going to pull this kind of crap.
if voting wasn’t this important, why do you think they’re working so hard to disenfranchise so many people?
Conventions aren’t just for amendments. They can be a vehicle to start over from scratch, just like they did in 1789. Then the only barrier we have is that final 3/4 threshold…
… But do you really think it will stop if they hold the thing, come out with a new document dominated by red state ideas, and it fails to get enacted? They will view the 13+ states that are not going along as traitors, and our newly minted President-King will do something rash to get the new document approved.
If a constitutional convention gets called, I fear we’ll end up with a 2-for-1 deal, and those MAGA bastards will finish the job that Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee started.
*~80%
Trump never got the votes of more than 20% of the population.
They never read the article, they just read the title and make shit up to fit their narrative
That’s exactly how they use the bible too!