7 ms·

Some of these no longer exist, but some do: Grandfather voting clauses: https://www.thoughtco.com/grandfather-clauses-voting-rights-4570970 https://www.thought

Some of these no longer exist, but some do: Grandfather voting clauses: https://www.thoughtco.com/grandfather-clauses-voting-rights-4570970 https://www.thoughtco.com/grandfather-clauses-voting-rights-... Felony disfranchisement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_disenfranchisement_in_the_United_States#Racial_disparities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_disenfranchisement_in_t... Related to felony disfranchisement, the war on drugs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_the_war_on_drugs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_the_war_on_drugs Gun control laws: https://newrepublic.com/article/112322/gun-control-racist https://newrepublic.com/article/112322/gun-control-racist Literacy tests: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_test#Voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_test#Voting Cash bail: https://harvardlawreview.org/2018/02/bail-reform-and-risk-assessment-the-cautionary-tale-of-federal-sentencing/ https://harvardlawreview.org/2018/02/bail-reform-and-risk-as... Stop and frisk: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-and-frisk_in_New_York_City#Controversy_regarding_misuse_and_claims_of_racial_profiling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-and-frisk_in_New_York_Cit... Some of these fall under the broader category of Jim Crow Laws[1], but most the original Jim Crow Laws are more obvious in their racism. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws

SEJeff 6y ago
redlining wasn't a law (it is illegal now), but it really supercharged these sorts of things by putting all of the PoC in very specific areas that were always depressed away from all of the white folk.
- throwlaplace 6y ago
  what's the difference between a law and a policy? redlining explicitly excluded black neighborhoods from FHA loans.
  - dannypgh 6y ago
    Laws are passed by Congress, policies are created by the executive to define things left unspecified by law, pursuant to broader powers granted by Congress. Policies that aren't laws carry the same effective force of law, but they can be changed on a whim by the president with an executive order. The Federal Home Loan Bank Act established the agencies that would create redlining, but the redlining itself was created by the administrators and independent agencies created by the act.
    - throwlaplace 6y ago
      Thanks for giving me the answer to a rhetorical question. My point was very simply that all of the black people that got denied loans don't care whether it was because of a law or a policy (and neither do I).
throwlaplace 6y ago
btw in florida the voters literally overwhelmingly voted for an amendment that re-enfranchised felons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Florida_Amendment_4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Florida_Amendment_4 and republicans are still trying to subvert it by sneaking in restitution as a prerequisite. it was challenged in the courts, overturned, and now appealed https://www.npr.org/2020/04/27/844297011/voting-rights-for-hundreds-of-thousands-of-felons-at-stake-in-florida-trial https://www.npr.org/2020/04/27/844297011/voting-rights-for-h... check out this tweet https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/1264687609995026437 https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/1264687609995026437 Edit: what exactly am I getting downvoted for? Did I post something that wasn't factually correct? Did I use foul language? Did I antagonize?
- JarlUlvi 6y ago
  You're not explaining the other side of the story. Many felons are convicted and owe fees to their victims, or to the govt. If you commit a violent crime, or a financial crime, there can be a financial penalty. Many of the felons that want to vote, never paid back their victims, or the state, for the crimes they were committed. The Florida proposition "restored the voting rights of Floridians with felony convictions after they complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation" Now, they want to vote, but still haven't compensated their victims, which was a part of the sentence, based on a lawful conviction.
  - kerkeslager 6y ago
    You haven't actually presented another side to the story, you've just cited a legitimate, but completely irrelevant, concern. If people aren't paying their debts, garnish their wages, seize their assets, or if they're flagrantly avoiding paying back debts, put them back in jail--you know, normal things that we already do which actually get people to pay back their debts. Failure to pay reparations is a legitimate concern, but it's not relevant to voting rights. Let's not pretend this is about reparations. It's about disfranchising people.
  - throwlaplace 6y ago
    False. I'm drawing attention to the amendment and what the will of the people was/is and efforts made to subvert that will. The amendment as on the ballot said nothing about requiring money as a prerequisite. That's what Florida voted for: returning freed felons their rights. To ascribe some other interpretation to "terms" is to subvert the will of the people of Florida. Ultimately the courts will decide whether the legal language "terms" includes fines and restitution. Seeing as these felons are free and fines are a civil matter I don't know how the courts could find that such things are part of their criminal sentence. Edit: also btw I linked to reputable sources. I didn't obscure anything or omit anything. It's right there on wiki: >However, by mid-2019 Republican Governor DeSantis signed a bill into law which originated in the Florida Senate, SB 7066, which required that "people with felony records pay 'all fines and fees' associated with their sentence prior to the restoration of their voting rights" It's a post facto qualifier. If fines were implied by the initial amendment this bill would be unnecessary.

SEJeff 6y ago

redlining wasn't a law (it is illegal now), but it really supercharged these sorts of things by putting all of the PoC in very specific areas that were always depressed away from all of the white folk.

throwlaplace 6y ago
what's the difference between a law and a policy? redlining explicitly excluded black neighborhoods from FHA loans.
- dannypgh 6y ago
  Laws are passed by Congress, policies are created by the executive to define things left unspecified by law, pursuant to broader powers granted by Congress. Policies that aren't laws carry the same effective force of law, but they can be changed on a whim by the president with an executive order. The Federal Home Loan Bank Act established the agencies that would create redlining, but the redlining itself was created by the administrators and independent agencies created by the act.
  - throwlaplace 6y ago
    Thanks for giving me the answer to a rhetorical question. My point was very simply that all of the black people that got denied loans don't care whether it was because of a law or a policy (and neither do I).

throwlaplace 6y ago

btw in florida the voters literally overwhelmingly voted for an amendment that re-enfranchised felons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Florida_Amendment_4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Florida_Amendment_4 and republicans are still trying to subvert it by sneaking in restitution as a prerequisite. it was challenged in the courts, overturned, and now appealed https://www.npr.org/2020/04/27/844297011/voting-rights-for-hundreds-of-thousands-of-felons-at-stake-in-florida-trial https://www.npr.org/2020/04/27/844297011/voting-rights-for-h... check out this tweet https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/1264687609995026437 https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/1264687609995026437 Edit: what exactly am I getting downvoted for? Did I post something that wasn't factually correct? Did I use foul language? Did I antagonize?

JarlUlvi 6y ago
You're not explaining the other side of the story. Many felons are convicted and owe fees to their victims, or to the govt. If you commit a violent crime, or a financial crime, there can be a financial penalty. Many of the felons that want to vote, never paid back their victims, or the state, for the crimes they were committed. The Florida proposition "restored the voting rights of Floridians with felony convictions after they complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation" Now, they want to vote, but still haven't compensated their victims, which was a part of the sentence, based on a lawful conviction.
- kerkeslager 6y ago
  You haven't actually presented another side to the story, you've just cited a legitimate, but completely irrelevant, concern. If people aren't paying their debts, garnish their wages, seize their assets, or if they're flagrantly avoiding paying back debts, put them back in jail--you know, normal things that we already do which actually get people to pay back their debts. Failure to pay reparations is a legitimate concern, but it's not relevant to voting rights. Let's not pretend this is about reparations. It's about disfranchising people.
- throwlaplace 6y ago
  False. I'm drawing attention to the amendment and what the will of the people was/is and efforts made to subvert that will. The amendment as on the ballot said nothing about requiring money as a prerequisite. That's what Florida voted for: returning freed felons their rights. To ascribe some other interpretation to "terms" is to subvert the will of the people of Florida. Ultimately the courts will decide whether the legal language "terms" includes fines and restitution. Seeing as these felons are free and fines are a civil matter I don't know how the courts could find that such things are part of their criminal sentence. Edit: also btw I linked to reputable sources. I didn't obscure anything or omit anything. It's right there on wiki: >However, by mid-2019 Republican Governor DeSantis signed a bill into law which originated in the Florida Senate, SB 7066, which required that "people with felony records pay 'all fines and fees' associated with their sentence prior to the restoration of their voting rights" It's a post facto qualifier. If fines were implied by the initial amendment this bill would be unnecessary.