If you continue to push this point, please consider this:
Literally every non-black voter actively dilutes the strength of black voters, in NYC and anywhere else.
Ergo, if you are so against diluting black vote, you must champion disallowing voting privileges for anyone who isn’t black. Agree ?
Yes.
Is this a view shared by the rest of the council? If not, how can you claim the intent of the law is racist?
Racial animus was shared by more than one Council Member. But, more importantly, the law dilutes the vote of Black citizens by allowing non-citizens to vote
JWK
Are you black ? If you are not, I have to assume you do not vote.
1 Like
Okay. All board members? A majority of board members? If not, the intent argument fails.
And once again, if every vote is diluted, you can’t prove that it is targeted.
The PILF did a very good job establishing racial animus among City Council members.
Are you suggesting they are lying?
JWK
No, of course not.
I am suggesting that if one, or even several members gave racial motivations, that fails the test for the law to be racially motivated. It seems to me that at least a majority of the council would have to say these things.
And again, the law does not specifically discriminate against black folks.
It most certainly discriminates against Black citizen voters whose vote is diluted by foreign nationals voting who are not citizens.
It discriminates against all voters equally. Everybody’s vote is “dilluted”. There is no disparate impact, and I say the lawsuit fails.
There you go again, making stuff up.
johnwk2
876
You apparently have not read the COMPLAINT, or chose to ignore what is found on page seven and documents the “disparate impact” of the non-citizen voting law.
JWK
“[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 have read the complaint multiple times. I am not disputing the contents if the complaint, I am disputing it’s conclusion. ALL voting pools will be dilluted, therefore there is no disparate impact on African Americans.
The complaint documents the disparate impact of the non-citizen voting law and its effect on Black citizens.
Why do you ignore the documentation which appears on page seven of the complaint?
JWK
I am not ignoring the documentation, I disagree with the conclusion.
You most certainly are ignoring the documentation establishes a disparate impact violation.
JWK
Whatevs. Let us wait and see how the suit goes.
I predict a dud
What do you want me to do about it?! Even if I agreed (which I don’t), it is entirely out of my hands. I am going to have to wait for the resolution, same as you.
This discussion is not about what you can do about the racial disparate impact created under the NYC non-citizen voting law. The discussion is about confirming there was an intentional racial animus expressed by Council Members who supported the law, in addition to a racial disparate impact being created by the law disfavoring Black citizen voters.
Are you now agreeing the above charges are correct after viewing the evidence?
JWK
“[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).”
Why do you keep haranguing me? I have made my position crystal clear, multiple times.
Go chew on somebody else’s ankles.
