Voter Suppression

Voter suppression has been a very big topic lately, especially after the Supreme Court’s recent ruling which states that the DOJ (Department of Justice) no longer has the ability to take action against states which show discriminatory action against voting. This ruling has cause a large influx of republican strong states to enact their own “suppression” laws. The most recent being Florida, which shortened the length of their early voting causing voters to wait in line for upwards of 8 hours to vote and causing many to give up (many of whom are African American and Hispanic).

North Carolina is also in the mix, the Governor, Patrick McCrory, recently signed a bill that forced all voters to show a picture ID and also shortened early voting to 10 days from 17. 61% of their voters vote early most of whom are African American.

Many feel that this is not suppression as you are required to show ID to do many daily tasks, but in reality anything that causes an action to become more difficult is a sort of suppression. In addition for those that feel these tactics are not suppression, how do you explain the shortening of early voting times?

Hillary Clinton recently spoke at the American Bar Associations national conference. She stated “Some take the historic success of the Voting Rights Act as a sign that discrimination is a thing of the past,” Clinton said. “By invalidating pre-clearance, the Supreme Court has shifted the burden back onto citizens facing discrimination and those lawyers willing to stand with them.”

As you can see voter suppression has reached pretty high up in the political ranks, and this is something that needs to be addressed. I have posted links below that you can visit to be sure your voice in heard on your voting rights. We also want to hear your voice, your opinions on this recent influx of voter suppression.

Join The Conversation and have your voice heard.

Resources

http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/stop-voter-suppression-2

http://www.change.org/petitions/stop-republican-voter-suppression

https://www.change.org/petitions/stand-against-gop-voter-suppression

http://act.colorofchange.org/sign/alec_b/

Citations,

Peyronnin, Joe. "North Carolina's Voter Suppression." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 14 Aug. 2013. Web. 15 Aug. 2013.

"McCrory Struggles with His Own Voter-suppression Law." MSNBC. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Aug. 2013.

Phillip, Abby D. "Hillary Clinton Launches Speaking Series, Denounces Voter Suppression Efforts." ABC News. ABC News Network, n.d. Web. 15 Aug. 2013.

Stop and Frisk in NYC

We all, as Americans have a right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. So how is the controversial ‘Stop and Frisk’ law still active? Well it all stems from a case in 1968 Terry V. Ohio, when the Supreme Court ruled it allowable. Since this time ‘Stop and Frisk’ has been used by law enforcement. Since then no other law enforcement agency has been more controversial in its use than the NYPD (New York Police Department).

The NYPD has been using the “Stop and Frisk’ tactic since 1970 in an attempt to curb crime rates. Statistics are hard to come by but the most recent stats between 2002 and 2012 show that over 4,800,000 people were subject to this act and over 4,000,000 of them were innocent. Furthermore over 85% of these subject to this act were either African American or Latino. This is an overwhelming amount that has cause the NYPD to endure a large amount of scrutiny.

The statistics really are hard to believe but it is something we all should be aware of. Especially since the purpose of this is to lower the crime rate. Now I must say that the crime rate in New York has dropped about 29% over the 11 year afore mentioned period. In contrast other cities that do not use this abusive tactic have seen larger decreases over the same period, “39% in Dallas and 59% in Los Angeles” to name a couple.

This being said what exactly does this ‘Stop and Frisk’ tactic entail, and what guidelines are meant to be followed. The ruling in 1968 states that the officer must have “Reasonable Suspicion” in order to use this tactic. This means that the officer has to factually believe that a crime is or is about to occur. This a obviously a very vague description which in some opinions give any officer the freedom to search any person at any time, despite the fact that the officer may have an ulterior motive.

Needless to say this is a very controversial tactic that specifically the NYPD seems to abuse. Now, we have provided the information, it is your turn to join The Conversation and tell us what you think. I have listed links below if you want further information on this law, and any recent developments with regard to it.

Join The Conversation and let us know your opinion.

http://www.nyclu.org/issues/racial-justice/stop-and-frisk-practices

http://www.legalzoom.com/us-law/privacy/when-can-police-stop

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/07/justice/new-york-stop-frisk-data

Support Sites

http://changethenypd.org/issue

http://forcechange.com/24517/investigate-police-discrimination-in-new-yorks-stop-and-frisk-policy/

Citations,

"Stop-and-Frisk Data | New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) - American Civil Liberties Union of New York State." Stop-and-Frisk Data | New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) - American Civil Liberties Union of New York State. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Aug. 2013.

"Stop And Frisk Facts | New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) - American Civil Liberties Union of New York State." Stop And Frisk Facts | New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) - American Civil Liberties Union of New York State. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Aug. 2013.