It is a fundamental prohibition of constitutional proportion. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election . . . shall not be denied or abridged . . . by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax. Amendment XXIV (1964)
But just as significant is that the matter was as provided statutes governing elections brought to the state Supreme Court. The fees paid, upon the state question:
that the district court had added additional qualification to the language and meaning of the state's constitution and that the name would be placed on the ballot.
When reason had to be, it was void. The concept that a state Court judge could elevate a partial excerpt of a reference of case and so change not only the voting rights of the minority and but also a change of the constitution of the state is unacceptable. That a review required of the consequences of such a decision is denied is outrageous conduct. It defies a true meaning of due process and substitutes additional denial of due process.
Due process is best defined in one word--fairness. Throughout the U.S.'s history, its constitutions, statutes and case law have provided standards for fair treatment of citizens by federal, state and local governments. These standards are known as due process. When a person is treated unfairly by the government, including the courts, he is said to have been deprived of or denied due process.
The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the deprivation of liberty or property without due process of law. A due process claim is cognizable only if there is a recognized liberty or property interest at stake. Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 569 (1972).
Negligence and arbitrarily applied procedures in the state's challenge process are further compounded by the State supreme abdication of review. Arbitrary procedures and the failure to provide adequate safeguards in that phase of the election process
are contrary to the very principles of judicial review and the sanctity that the laws of the Constitution and state constitution are superior.
Modern federalism adds an additional measure. Since 1970, and the national revenue sharing administrations, the states have been "-induced' to participate with the federal entity to assure certain objectives and programs with "grants"-. Participating states could opt out of participation in the general programs of the Federal government. Or they could choose to apply for discretionary grants, which require that State or its agency an certain obligation.
COMPELLING MANDATE
Since 2002, the primary vehicle for funding to the States has been the "Help America Vote Act"-. The goals of HAVA included: replace punch card voting systems, create the
Election Assistance Commission to assist in the administration of Federal elections; and establish minimum election standards. Under HAVA, New Mexico provides an ongoing
Certification that the standards in the conduct of elections include "Safeguards to ensure that eligible voters are not removed in error from the official list of eligible voters. "-
New Mexico is a participatory state, thus the complaint does not erode the right of the States.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
