And you know the answer. Of course there are. Aside from that, you seem to question the legitimacy of the Public Interest Legal Foundation filing the lawsuit they did. What do you find objectionable or an illegitimate complaint? HERE IS THE COMPLAINT
Keep in mind what our very own Supreme Court has stated in regard to diluting the vote:
“[T]he right of suffrage can be denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a citizen’s vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting the free exercise of the franchise.” Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533, 555 (1964).”
I believe the parry to your thrust is that white voters who are having their vote diluted could perhaps equally file a suit, but the justice system might be a lot less sympathetic to a complaint from an allegedly privileged group.
If the complaint is that NYC council is acting deliberately to restrict the rights of black citizens, it obviously has no merit.
Obviously I am fine with court deciding the legality of the voting expansion, that’s what courts are for. It’s the allegation that this law targets one demographic that makes zero sense.
The problem with your thinking appears to be, you question the legitimacy of citizens, who happen to be Black, filing a lawsuit because their vote is being diluted by foreign nationals. Is their vote being diluted by foreign nationals? And in answer to that very question our S. C. has stated: “[T]he right of suffrage can be denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a citizen’s vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting the free exercise of the franchise.” Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533, 555 (1964).”
The scary truth about allowing foreigners to vote in local elections is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction [as they do in NYC] “they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.” Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)”.
Also, let us not forget the wisdom of Justice Story:
“If aliens might be admitted indiscriminately to enjoy all the rights of citizens at the will of a single state, the Union might itself be endangered by an influx of foreigners, hostile to its institutions, ignorant of its powers, and incapable of a due estimate of its privileges.” – Joseph Story
JWK
Why have a written constitution approved by the people if those who it is designed to control are free to make it mean whatever they wish it to mean?
Why on earth do you question Black Citizens complaining that their vote is being diluted by allowing foreign nationals to vote in NYC elections, when the complaint is indisputably a true?
It’s obvious you are repeating yourself rather than explain why you question the reasoning for the Public Interest Legal Foundation filing the lawsuit. Of course the NYC voting law “targets” a specific demographic . . . IT TARGETS FOREIGN NATIONALS, allowing them to exercise a citizen’s right to vote . . . a right denied to Black citizens which they fought tooth and nail to exercise, and exercise as “Citizens of the United States.” Do you not see distinction between Citizens of the United States and foreign nationals?
JWK
“If aliens might be admitted indiscriminately to enjoy all the rights of citizens at the will of a single state, the Union might itself be endangered by an influx of foreigners, hostile to its institutions, ignorant of its powers, and incapable of a due estimate of its privileges.” – Joseph Story
No, the part that I took issue with is the implication that the law is being enacted to specifically dilute black vote - as if no other demographic currently votes in NYC i.e. racist NYC city council is doing this to target black voters.
I am not sure why you continue to misrepresent my point.
You don’t see a distinction between Citizens of the United States and foreign nationals?
Additionally, I do not misrepresent your “point”. I continue to correctly state that the law [allowing over 400,000 foreign nationals to vote in NYC elections] does in fact dilute the vote of Black Citizens. Is this not an irrefutable fact?
Does it only dilute the vote of Black citizens ? Would the White, Asian, Middle-eastern, Native American, Latino and Pacific Islander vote somehow magically be left undiluted ?
There you go again, asking a question, the answer of which is self-evident. Of course not. But allowing 400,000 foreign nationals to vote in NYC’s election most certainly dilutes the vote of Black citizens.
I fully agree with the Public Interest Legal Foundation filing the lawsuit and agree with their COMPLAINT Do you?
I have already addressed that question HERE Why do you bring it up again?
I wrote:
I’m not a mind reader. If you want an answer, why don’t you ask the City Council?
What I do know is, the City Council has in fact diluted the Black vote in NYC with over 400 thousand foreign national votes
see:
Well, that is what the lawsuit claims, and it’s crap. Sure, black votes are diluted. And white votes. And brown votes. Pretty much all of the votes of legal residents and citizens.
I suggest you read the ACTUAL COMPLAINT, especially what is found under “Direct Evidence of Impermissible Racial Intent: Statements by Council Members Explicitly Discuss Racial Intent”
Aside from that, can you honestly claim the voting strength of NYC’s Black Citizens is not being diluted by foreign nationals? That very question seems to be addressed by our S. C. as follows:
“[T]he right of suffrage can be denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a citizen’s vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting the free exercise of the franchise.” Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533, 555 (1964).”
The troubling truth about allowing foreigners to vote in local elections is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction [as they do in NYC] “they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.” Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)”.
And, let us not forget what Justice Story says regarding the issue:
“If aliens might be admitted indiscriminately to enjoy all the rights of citizens at the will of a single state, the Union might itself be endangered by an influx of foreigners, hostile to its institutions, ignorant of its powers, and incapable of a due estimate of its privileges.” – Joseph Story
