DOJ Accused of Stalling on MOVE Act for Voters in Military

[TheSarge]

The Department of Justice is ignoring a new law aimed at protecting the right of American soldiers to vote, according to two former DOJ attorneys who say states are being encouraged to use waivers to bypass the new federal Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act.

The MOVE Act, enacted last October, ensures that servicemen and women serving overseas have ample time to get in their absentee ballots. The result of the DOJ's alleged inaction in enforcing the act, say Eric Eversole and J. Christian Adams — both former litigation attorneys for the DOJ’s Voting Section — could be that thousands of soldiers' ballots will arrive too late to be counted.

"It is an absolute shame that the section appears to be spending more time finding ways to avoid the MOVE Act, rather than finding ways to ensure that military voters will have their votes counted," said Eversole, director of the Military Voter Protection Project, a new organization devoted to ensuring military voting rights. "The Voting Section seems to have forgotten that it has an obligation to enforce federal law, not to find and raise arguments for states to avoid these laws."

Adams, a conservative blogger (www.electionlawcenter.com) who gained national attention when he testified against his former employer after it dropped its case against the New Black Panther Party, called the DOJ’s handling of the MOVE Act akin to “keystone cops enforcement.”

“I do know that they have adopted positions or attempted to adopt positions to waivers that prove they aren’t interested in aggressively enforcing the law,” Adams told FoxNews.com. “They shouldn’t be going to meeting with state election officials and telling them they don’t like to litigate cases and telling them that the waiver requirements are ambiguous.”

The MOVE act requires states to send absentee ballots to overseas military troops 45 days before an election, but a state can apply for a waiver if it can prove a specific "undue hardship" in enforcing it.

Sen. John Cornyn,R-Texas – who co-sponsored MOVE – wrote a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder on July 26 saying he is concerned that the Department of Justice is allowing states to opt out of the new law.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/28/exclusive-doj-stalls-voter-registration-law-military/

[Wineslob]

Why am I not surprised, considering this admin?     

[Airwolf]

No surprise here either. November cannot come soon enough.

[TheSarge]

Why am I not surprised, considering this admin?     

Oh...but it gets better.  From the article:

Adams and Eversole separately pointed out that the DOJ’s website lacks any mention of the MOVE Act. In fact, the section on military voting includes the outdated and nonbinding 30-day recommendation for sending out ballots. There is no mention of the the current 45-day mandate.

But the DOJ's online voting section includes a detailed section devoted to helping felons learn how get their voting rights back.

[thundley4]

It wouldn't surprise me if they try and find some way to disenfranchise all military voters overseas.

[Thor]

The Administration seems to want to turn a blind eye to ANYTHING remotely "conservative". The military vote tends to lean conservative, so that's the reason they could GAF about them. It's similar to the border issue. What ever happened to "equal protection under the law" ?? I sure would like to see a civil rights violation lawsuit filed against this Administration.

[vesta111]

The Administration seems to want to turn a blind eye to ANYTHING remotely "conservative". The military vote tends to lean conservative, so that's the reason they could GAF about them. It's similar to the border issue. What ever happened to "equal protection under the law" ?? I sure would like to see a civil rights violation lawsuit filed against this Administration.

I posted about this over a year ago I believe and was beaten up by a bunch of you.

The facts as I understood it back in the 70's was that only the votes for the commander in chief were counted and anyone living on a military instillation that voted against the sitting president, their votes were thrown out.

The Military swears an oath to the president and if he has just served one term then to vote for anyone else  was not acceptable.   Thinking  as I was told was anyone who tried to vote the president out was trying to over throw the sitting president  or some such crap.

[littlelamb]

I wonder how many people that are in uniform are going to make this a issue

[miskie]

The facts as I understood it back in the 70's was that only the votes for the commander in chief were counted and anyone living on a military instillation that voted against the sitting president, their votes were thrown out.

The Military swears an oath to the president and if he has just served one term then to vote for anyone else  was not acceptable.   Thinking  as I was told was anyone who tried to vote the president out was trying to over throw the sitting president  or some such crap.

I think what you have written there is a fundamental misunderstanding of The Hatch Act.

This act applies to military and other nonpartisan govt agencies. The Hatch Act prevents public partisan campaigning or displays of support (bumper stickers, lawn signs etc) for any particular candidate or party. The act absolutely does not deny the right to vote and have your vote be counted.

In its own way, the Hatch Act is the political equivalent of DADT...

[TheSarge]

I posted about this over a year ago I believe and was beaten up by a bunch of you.

The facts as I understood it back in the 70's was that only the votes for the commander in chief were counted and anyone living on a military instillation that voted against the sitting president, their votes were thrown out.

The Military swears an oath to the president and if he has just served one term then to vote for anyone else  was not acceptable.   Thinking  as I was told was anyone who tried to vote the president out was trying to over throw the sitting president  or some such crap.

As well you should have been.

The "facts" however you thought or think you understand them on this are sh*t.

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

We swear no oath of alligence to any President...only that we will obey his orders according to regulations.

You Libs ALWAYS get that mixed up.  You'd LIKE us to swear an oath of loylalty to the President...but only when it's a Dem.

[vesta111]

As well you should have been.

The "facts" however you thought or think you understand them on this are sh*t.

We swear no oath of alligence to any President...only that we will obey his orders according to regulations.

You Libs ALWAYS get that mixed up.  You'd LIKE us to swear an oath of loylalty to the President...but only when it's a Dem.

Ok, you have a darn good point but if this is so, why don't all the men and woman in the military know this.


I had a bumper sticker on my car that I drove all over the base I lived on and no one said a word.    There was nothing on the sticker to denote it as a political statement, just 4 words.      Lick The Big Dick

My neighbor had a sticker that had 4 words.   Get Your Shit Together

One day both of us left the base and I followed her back on, she was flagged through, me I was pulled out of line and 2 ,19 year old marines laughing their heads off told me I could not come back on base as I was speaking against their commander and chief.

Why did they think I saw speaking of Nixon? Nice kids, very young and who knows the next year they most likely would  find themselves in the Asian Jungle ducking  both enemy and friendly fire.

These were crazy days for us military dependents, one night at the Chiefs club I noticed a table with a dozen or so black family's sitting around laughing hysterically. I walked over pulled up a chair as I knew everyone at the table and asked what the heck was so funny.  My friend looked at me and said her husband had told a funny joke.  So can  you tell me the joke I asked, everyone at the table then again burst out laughing and I was told this was a black joke and I would never understand.

This joke is now almost 40 years old I did understand and still find it funny.

I would love to tell you guys but don't want to get banned AGAIN.

[miskie]

Again - Hatch Act -- your bumper sticker can be interpreted as having political bias. Every citizen is allowed whatever political bias they wish, as well as the ability to vote for whoever they wish, but their political leanings must be kept 'away from work' in any environment the act applies to.


The military and other civil servants are supposed to portray a public image as politically neutral, when engaged with whatever they do - If its a 9 to 5 civil service job - then its neutrality while on the clock, if its military (and correct me if I'm wrong on this) its while in active duty, or participating in any government event. (be it under orders or while in uniform)

Its not that they liked or disliked Nixon - its that they cannot create a public impression that they liked or disliked Nixon - they must also respect the CiC - regardless of what their personal opinions are. public respect & private opinions are two very different things.

[docstew]

The standard is you cannot espouse a political opinion while in uniform, as that could give the impression that the military endorses one political party over another.  However, there is, and can be, no action taken at a voting booth to invalidate a service member's vote against the President or his party.  Such an action would not only be illegal, but if systematically applied, would likely lead to the coup libs like you always go on and on about.  Just because we join up doesn't mean we forfeit our rights, we just have to exercise them outside our workplace.

And if you surveyed Soldiers by bumper stickers on their car, it would be quite clear who they prefer, and no one is ever stopped, at a gate or otherwise.

The point of the article is that the 0bama DOJ doesn't care about enforcing laws that will lead to more R votes, which is what the military overwhelmingly votes, while courting the votes of those who have lost their right to do so.

[TheSarge]

Ok, you have a darn good point but if this is so, why don't all the men and woman in the military know this.

Are you hitting the bottle again before you post?  We DO know this!!!  The only ones that don't are Liberal idiots.

I would love to tell you guys but don't want to get banned AGAIN.

If that's the end result...then I'm all for you telling the damn joke.