Holder's DOJ down in flames over Texas voter ID Law

MUST READ – Texas Voter ID Trial – Holder DOJ

By SUA Staff – The Department of Justice under Eric Holder with the mandate from the Obama White House as well as from Robert Bauer, the Obama personal lawyer of record for years, has established a habit of suing RED states that are historically opposed to liberal agendas. One such law suit is underway presently in the case of voter ID requirements in the state of Texas. Final arguments are now being completed, but it looks very bad for the federal government.

The entire narrative of the left, and specifically Eric Holder regarding voter suppression is pure bunk, and the State of Texas proved it. All the rhetoric coming from his camp is not just rhetoric, its blatantly false. His ‘experts’ are not experts, they used “Wikipedia Facts” that weren’t facts, and what was said in public had to be re-canted under sworn testimony. But despite this the Attorney General, Eric Holder, Jr., spoke in front of the NAACP this week and said the following:

Eric Holder delivers blistering speech to the NAACP Event in Houston despite the complete failure of his arguments in federal court.

“We call those poll taxes.”

What is worse, its all about fear tactics:

Holder has relentlessly launched legal challenges to every voter ID law in the land, but to my knowledge he has never asserted in court that they were poll taxes.  Whatever political latitude we might choose to extend to the Attorney General, it seems certain that his job should not involve lying about the law to frighten American citizens into cooperation with his political agenda.

We occasionally hear criticism of “the politics of fear.”  The contrast between Romney and Holder [speaking at the NAACP event in Houston] illustrates the politics of fear perfectly.  The NAACP got to hear ridiculous scare tactics from an embattled Attorney General who felt free to address them as if they were imbeciles, easily frightened into obedience with the most absurd and extreme rhetoric. (Read the rest at Human Events)

Then we compare his public statements about Florida and Texas, cleaning their voter rolls and requiring a government ID like Indiana, (which was constitutionally upheld) to what took place in federal court about Texas. SUA read the entire “fact sheet” provided by the State of Texas about the lack of any evidence supporting the DOJ’s claims or Holder’s assertions. What it did prove however, is that Eric Holder, the left, and their boss are lying to America.

The summary document provided by the State of Texas must be required reading by all voters. It completely debunks the entire narrative, stem to stern. Its a bit lengthy, but your hair will ignite as you read it here:

MUST READ – Texas Voter ID Trial – Holder DOJ

How is this man still in office?

Texas Demolishes USDOJ’s Case Against Voter I.D.

Feds could not produce a single person, or provide the name of a single person, who will legitimately be unable to vote due to voter i.d.

By Jim Forsyth – WOAI Local News (Texas)

Testimony has concluded in the trial of Texas ‘Voter I.D.’ law, after attorneys for the state demolished the main arguments raised against the law by the Obama Administration, and got the key witness for the Justice Department to admit he got his information from Wikipedia, 1200 WOAI news reports.

The Justice Department presented what it said was evidence that as many as 1.5 million Texans don’t have the government issued photo i.d. required to vote, but Attorney General Greg Abbott says of the people on that roll, 50,000 are dead, 330,000 are over the age of 65 and can vote by mail, where a photo i.d. is not required, and more than 800,000 are on the list improperly.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott

Among the people who the DOJ listed as ‘lacking the required documentation needed to vote’ are Former President George W. Bush, San Antonio State Senator Leticia Van de Putte, and Licia Ellis, who’s husband, Houston state Senator Rodney Ellis, on Wednesday blasted the voter i.d. law as ‘just like the racist murder of James Byrd’ who was dragged to death in east Texas in 1998.

In fact, University of Texas students conducted a telephone survey of random people on the DOJ’s list of people who allegedly don’t have the documents required to vote, and found that more than 90% of them, including 93% of African Americans and 92% of Hispanics on the list, actually have a photo i.d.

Which brings us to Victoria Rodriguez. The San Antonio teenager was the only individual in a flurry of ‘experts’ the Department of Justice called to the stand to represent the 1.5 million allegedly set to be disenfranchised under the Texas law. Rodriguez testified that she not only lacks a photo i.d., but lacks the documentation need to obtain one, and State Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer said requiring her to pay to obtain those documents would amount to an illegal ‘poll tax.’

Under cross examination, Rodriguez admitted that she has a birth certificate, a voter registration card, and a Social Security Card, and only two of those three forms of i.d. are required to obtain a free voter i.d. card offered by the DPS. Rodriguez testified that she ‘doesn’t have time’ to go the DPS office to obtain the voter i.d. card, but she testified she had plenty of time to fly more than 1500 miles to Baltimore, catch a train to Washington DC, and sit for hours in a federal courtroom to testify about how unfair the Texas voter i.d. law is.

Perhaps the most embarrassing for the Justice Department was the testimony of its alleged expert witness, Harvard Professor Stephen Ansolabehere.

He testified that his research shows the law is ‘more likely to affect black and Hispanic voters worst than white voters.’

But under cross examination, Ansolabehere testified that in fact ‘almost no one is excluded’ by the requirement to vote.

Another Department of Justice ‘expert’ testified that the Legislature ‘intended’ to discriminate against minorities when it passed the Voter I.D. bill. But J. Morgan Kousser’s comments under cross examination show he knows little to nothing about the Texas Legislature (he referred to State Sen. Leticia Van De Putte as the enate Minority Leader, a position that doesn’t exist in the Texas Legislature) and lawyers for the state pointed out that he said the U.S. Supreme Court ruling which upheld a similar voter i.d. law in Indiana, a decision which was written by Justices O’Connor, Kennedy, Scalia, Rehnquist, and Thomas, was written so the five, laughably, could ‘promote white supremacy.’

Kousser also claimed in a book that Republicans are ‘not legitimate representatives’ of minority communities, and that any African American or Hispanic who supports voter i.d. ‘has been manipulated and misled by Republicans.

In fact, Kousser admitted that he got many of the ‘facts’ used to buttress these bizarre claims from ‘Wikipedia,’ an on line encyclopedia that anybody, including Kousser himself, can upload information onto.

The three judge federal appeals court panel, which includes two Democrats and one Republican, will issue its ruling on the case in the coming weeks, and the ruling will certainly be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

9 States' AG's – Call Obama to task on illegal violations

Editor’s Note – In this election year, the campaigns for the Republican nomination are being packaged as attack sessions, correctly, but they have been talking about the issues listed below as well. Of course, the media will not focus on these extremely important points, and the Obama 2012 Campaign is doing all it can to make sure it stays that way.

We at SUA certainly hope we see the vetting process on Obama actually get performed this time around in the media, if not, maybe the courts will finally deal with the complete disregard for our Constitution. Then it is our duty, and that of his opponent to constantly raise these issues so the voters will finally see that Obama is the “king with new clothes”, a naked failure.

Eric Holder gave us a convoluted explanation on why killing US citizens over seas with drones and missiles was legal yesterday, and they will soon have to argue over the constitutionality of Obama Care at SCOTUS shortly. These are important, but they are not the only issues as is well documented below.

Then there is the Fast and Furious scandal. Any Republican administration prior would have been scathingly attacked if it did a mere shadow of these trangressions, yet, Obama is at least tied for the race to the White House with Mitt Romney. Time to get educated and to educate others.

RSLC.com

Attorneys General Join Forces to Call Into Account Illegal Obama Administration Violations

MEMO:          A Report on Obama Administration Violations of Law

Just another illegal move - non-recess, recess appointment of Richard Cordray
FROM:           Attorneys General:
      • Tom Horne, Arizona;
      • Pam Bondi, Florida;
      • Sam Olens, Georgia;
      • Bill Schuette, Michigan;
      • Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma;
      • Marty Jackley, South Dakota;
      • Alan Wilson, South Carolina;
      • Greg Abbott, Texas;
      • Ken Cuccinelli, Virginia

DATE:            March 5, 2012

---

Introduction

As chief legal officers of the states and commonwealths, attorneys general are the last line of defense against an increasingly overreaching federal government.  Attorneys general have a duty to uphold the laws of their respective states and uphold the U.S. and state constitutions.

One of the ways in which attorneys general protect the integrity of state laws and constitutions is by carefully reviewing the actions of the federal government and responding when they break the law or overstep the bounds of the Constitution.

Federalism is the division of authority between the federal and state governments that the Founding Fathers created to provide a check on federal power so that the federal government would not become destructive of the very liberty it was instituted to protect.

While some naïvely argue that the Constitution should “evolve” due to the fact that our Founders could not have foreseen the issues faced by our country today, they forget that the Founders faced tyranny firsthand and understood it well.  This led to the creation of a Constitution that relies on limited government, precisely to protect our citizens from today’s unprecedented overstepping of the “division of authority.”

The Landscape

While each Attorney General has policy disagreements with the Obama Administration, those disagreements are not what serve as the basis for this effort.  For example, this Administration makes many decisions and takes numerous actions that Republican attorneys general find politically ignorant or flawed from a policy standpoint.  However, that does not make those decisions or actions illegal.  The purpose of this report is to outline actions taken by this Administration that are violations of law.

The obvious example is a federal health care overhaul, passed against the will of the majority of Americans and more importantly in violation of the Constitution, which is now being challenged by more than half of the states.

While the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) has received the most attention, it serves as a representation of a much larger picture that demonstrates the continued disdain for the Constitution and laws shown by the Obama Administration.

Through the collective review by a committee of Attorneys General from nine of the 50 states, the group identified more than 21 illegal actions from this Administration and is highlighting the effects of the federal overreach on our citizens and states.

The Impact

Whether it is through the EPA, NLRB, Office of Surface Mining, FCC or other entities, the Obama Administration has aggressively used administrative agencies to implement policy objectives that cannot gain congressional approval and are outside of the law.

In Florida, a state with one of the most aggressive and innovative water quality protection programs in the country, the EPA chose to impose its own costly, unprecedented and unscientific numeric nutrient criteria.  The estimated impact the EPA’s rules would impose was dramatic, including billions of dollars in compliance costs, significant spikes in utility bills and the loss of thousands of jobs.  The Florida Attorney General’s Office sued the EPA and two weeks ago prevailed when a federal judge in Tallahassee threw out the costliest of the EPA’s rules, the one governing Florida’s streams and rivers.  In doing so, the judge found the EPA’s rules were not based on sound science and that the agency had failed to prove that its rule would prevent any harm to the environment – in other words, the EPA was found to have violated the law.

In South Carolina, the NLRB’s recess-appointed, unconfirmed general counsel threatened to sue the state for guaranteeing a secret ballot in union elections, despite 83 percent of South Carolinians voting for an amendment for such action.  When South Carolina was joined by three other states in mounting a vigorous defense, the NLRB backed down but turned their attention to Boeing, a private company and corporate citizen of South Carolina, telling the employer where they could or could not locate facilities.  Again – after a high-profile fight – the NLRB backed down in their complaint against Boeing, but only after the company and the union worked through an agreement.

In Arizona, voters passed a referendum requiring that individuals registering to vote show evidence that they are citizens.  Over 90 percent of the population can satisfy this simply by writing down a driver’s license number or naturalization number.  The less than 10 percent of those who do not have these numbers are able to register by mailing a copy of a birth certificate, passport, Indian registration number or similar documentation.  The Obama Administration argued against Arizona in the Ninth Circuit and a decision is yet to be made.

In Oklahoma, the EPA illegally usurped Oklahoma’s authority in the Clean Air Act to determine the state’s own plan for addressing sources of emissions by imposing a federal implementation plan.  The federal plan goes beyond the authority granted to the EPA in the Clean Air Act and will result in a $2 billion cost to install technology needed to complete the EPA plan and a permanent increase of 15-20 percent in the cost of electricity.  The Obama Administration is fighting Oklahoma’s appeal, which was filed in  the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The ongoing fight over the individual mandate and these four state examples serve as only a representation of the more than 21 Obama Administration violations that attorneys general are fighting against.

Taking Action

What these nine Attorneys General have collectively confirmed is that this Administration repeatedly shows disdain for states, federal laws it finds inconvenient, the Constitution and the courts.

With the release of this report, and its extensive list of transgressions, two principles are abundantly clear:

  • This group of nine Attorneys General will grow and continue to serve as a de facto “task force,” assisting when possible to defend state laws and identifying “best practices” and legal arguments to fight back against the Obama Administration’s illegalities in a more cohesive and effective manner;
  • The next election is critically important and as the states’ chief legal officers, the attorneys general will make a concerted effort to educate their states’ voters on the impacts that the Obama Administration’s legal violations have on their every day lives.

Regardless of party, when Washington politicians fail to adhere to the Constitution and the rule of law, state attorneys general become the last line of defense against an overreaching federal government.

List of Violations

  • FCC: Regulation of the Internet in the face of a court order from Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington D.C. stating that the FCC does not have the power to regulate the Internet
  • PPACA: Individual Mandate; To be heard by Supreme Court of the United States in March
  • EPA 1: GHG lawsuit; EPA’s own Inspector General reported last September that EPA failed to comply with its own data standards; Heard in Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington D.C. in February
  • OSM: Attempting to impose regulatory requirements on the 19 states with authority for exclusive regulation of their coalmines for the first time in more than 30 years
  • NLRB: Boeing; Engaged in unprecedented behavior as described by former Chairmen under both Presidents Bush (43) and Clinton; behavior is best exemplified in South Carolina where the Board tried to muzzle over 80 percent of state voters who supported a secret ballot amendment to the South Carolina Constitution and attempted unsuccessfully to tell an employer in the state where they can and cannot base manufacturing facilities
  • EPA: Florida Water; EPA’s numeric nutrient criteria pre-empted Florida standards; U.S. District Judge upheld the state’s site-specific alternative criteria for streams and rivers
  • EPA: Texas Air; TX filed lawsuit challenging Cross-State Air Pollution Rules; application rule to TX was particularly dubious because state was included in the regulation at the last minute and without an opportunity to respond to the proposed regulation; regulation was based on a dubious claim that air pollution from TX affected a single air-quality monitor in Granite City, Illinois more than 500 miles and three states away from Texas
  • EPA: Oklahoma Air; EPA illegally usurped Oklahoma’s authority in the Clean Air Act to determine the state’s own plan for addressing sources of emissions that affect visibility, by imposing a federal implementation plan; Federal plan goes beyond the authority granted to the EPA in the Clean Air Act and will result in $2 billion in cost to install technology needed to complete the EPA plan, and a permanent increase of 15-20 percent in the cost of electricity; Obama Administration is fighting Oklahoma’s appeal, which was filed in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals
  • HHS: Religious Liberty; HHS mandated religious entities such as Catholic, Baptist and Jewish schools and churches be required to provided medical services they find unconscionable to their employees; President attempted to compromise with an “accommodation” in name only that required insurance companies to provide the services for free to the religious organization employees; Accommodation made matters worse as many religious-base hospitals and schools are self-insurers; Seven Attorneys General filed suit to protect religious liberty and oppose the HHS mandate
  • DOJ: South Carolina & Voting Rights Act: Rejecting voter ID statutes that are similar to those already approved by the Supreme Court of the United States; DOJ ignored section 8 of the Voting Rights Act which calls for protections against voter fraud, and used section 5 to administratively block measures to protect the integrity of elections passed by state legislatures in preclearance states including South Carolina; South Carolina voter ID law merely requires a voter to show photo identification in order to vote or to complete an affidavit at the pain of perjury if the voter does not have a photo ID
  • DOJ: Arizona & Voting Rights Act: Rejecting voter ID statutes that are similar to those already approved by the Supreme Court of the United States
  • DOJ: Arizona Immigration; In violation of 10th Amendment, federal government to sue to prevent AZ from using reasonable measures to discourage illegal immigration within Arizona’s borders; Affects Arizona because state has a large percentage, compared to other states, of illegal immigrants and need to be able to act to reduce the number
  • DOJ: Alabama Immigration; The DOJ challenged Alabama’s immigration reform laws after parts were “green lighted” by a federal judge; DOJ appealed the ruling; parts of the AL case have been struck down in various federal courts; specific provisions of the law include collection of the immigration status of public school students, businesses must use E-Verify, prohibition of illegal immigrants receiving public benefits; the provision requiring immigrants to always carry alien registration cards; allowance of lawsuits by state citizens who do not believe public officials are enforcing the law
  • DOJ: South Carolina Immigration; DOJ challenged South Carolina’s immigration reform laws that are very similar to the AZ which is scheduled to appear before the United States Supreme Court; SC case will be heard by the 4th Circuit soon there after as the 4th Circuit granted SC motion to extend the filing time until after the US Supreme Court issues an Opinion in AZ
  • Congressional: “Recess” appointments to NLRB (three) and CFPB (one)
  • EEOC: Hosanna Tabor (MI); Sought to reinstate a minister who was discharged for her disagreement with the religious doctrine of the church
  • DOE: Yucca Mountain; In 2009, Administration arbitrarily broke federal law and derailed the most studied energy project in American history when DOE announced intent to withdraw 8,000 page Yucca Mountain licensing application with prejudice; SC and Washington State filed suit, as a result, contesting the unconstitutional action; American people have paid more than $31 billion (including interest) through percentages of electric rate fees towards the project and taxpayers have footed an addition $200 million in legal feeds and over $2 billion in judgments against the DOE for breaking contracts associated with Yucca Mountain
  • DOI: Glendale Casino (AZ); Glendale is a violation because the Federal Government is forcing a family-oriented town, Glendale, to become another Las Vegas against its will.  Essentially, the Federal Government has granted ‘reservation status’ to a 54-acre plot in the same town, where the Tohono O’odham Nation plans to build a resort and casino.

AG Abbott Letter to Obama – ‘I Told You So’

Editor’s Note – When we ask if we are secure on our borders, the current administration tells us we are safer than we have ever been. The arrests are up and the illegal immigration is down. Janet Napolitano said:

“There is a perception that the border is worse now than it ever has been,” Napolitano said at the Bridge of The Americas border crossing in El Paso, Texas, the Associated Press reports. “That is wrong. The border is better now than it ever has been.”

However, the people who live in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California know better. Just ask Sheriff Paul Babeu of Pinal County Arizona who is calling for Holder’s resignation, or in this case, the Attorney General of Texas. Read what the AG of Texas has to say to Obama:

Greg Abbott Tells Obama to PROTECT US NOW after Texas Officer Shot by Mexican Drug Cartel on Border

By David Bellow

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott sent a letter to President Obama on November 2nd, 2011. The letter had a clear message.

I TOLD YOU SO!

Greg Abbott has been pleading for the Obama Administration to take action to protect the Texas Border from these violent Drug Cartels. The Drug Cartels have killed tens of thousands of innocent victims and now the Drug Cartel violence is spilling onto the American side. Earlier this year I posted a video of a battle that happened on the border across from Roma, TX. The explosions and gunfire were easily seen and heard from the Texas side. I have also written articles detailing shootouts between the Drug Cartels and Texas Law enforcement and also about how Texas children are being recruited and killed by Mexican drug cartels.

Greg Abbott warned President Obama that soon these Drug Cartel bullets will harm Americans on the Texas side of the Border.

Sure enough, Greg Abbott was right.

A Texas Deputy was shot 3 times in a shootout last weekend.

Following this recent incident, Greg Abbott sent a letter to President Obama pleading for him to take action to protect Americans by protecting the Border. He used this recent incident as his example.

Below is the Letter that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott sent to President Obama on November 2nd, 2011:

Dear Mr. President,

Over a year ago, I wrote to you warning of the increasing threat of cartel-related violence spilling across our border with Mexico. At the time, gunfire from cartels in Juarez had crossed over the border into El Paso. Fortunately for El Pasoans, those bullets struck only buildings, rather than bodies. But as I warned back then, we cannot simply rely on good fortune to protect American lives from the ever-present threat of cartel violence on our southern border. Since the incident in El Paso, the threat from the cartels has only grown—and now the bullets have struck Americans. Just last weekend, in a deadly shootout with cartel operatives, a deputy sheriff in Hidalgo County, Texas, was shot three times. Thankfully the officer survived, but the Hidalgo County Sheriff confirmed that the shooting spilled over from ongoing drug wars involving the Gulf Cartel in Mexico.

Unfortunately, last week’s gun battle in Hidalgo County was not an isolated incident. In January of this year, highway workers repairing a road near a known drug-smuggling route were fired upon from the southern side of the border near Fort Hancock, Texas. In June, Texas law enforcement officers near Abram, Texas, exchanged fire with drug smugglers who attacked them from across the border. In May, U.S. Border Patrol agents near Mission, Texas, also came under fire under similar circumstances. And in September, one man was killed when cartel operatives exchanged gunfire between vehicles driving down a highway in McAllen, Texas.

Within just the last two weeks, three high-level cartel leaders have been arrested inside the United States. Reports indicate they were hiding in Texas in an attempt to avoid violence in Mexico. But the violence is already starting to follow these criminals to the United States, as the increasing cartel activity in South Texas demonstrates. Their presence in our country is more evidence that the cartels increasingly view the porous border as no more than a line on a map. And if your Administration continues to fail to secure the border against this threat, it is only a matter of time before American lives are lost.

I implore you to aggressively confront this escalating threat. The safety and security of the Americans you have pledged to defend is at risk because of the cartel battles spilling across our border. To protect American lives, your administration must immediately dedicate more manpower to border security—especially along the 1,254 mile Texas border, which remains unacceptably porous. Texas and its law enforcement personnel at the state, county and local levels remain committed to working with your Administration to maintain the highest level of public safety. We ask that you collaborate with us to accomplish that goal before more American blood is lost.

I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Greg Abbott

Attorney General of Texas