The Supreme Court and guns

[saden1]

Section 11(b) of the 1965 Voting Rights Act:

No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for voting or attempting to vote, or intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for urging or aiding any person to vote or attempt to vote, or intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for exercising any powers or duties under section 3(a), 6, 8, 9, 10, or 12(e).

The only time this section was used to prosecute was to prosecute Jesse Helms campaign staffers:

In a combative 1990 reelection campaign, Helms nearly lost to African American Harvey Gantt. The former Democratic mayor of Charlotte was ahead of Helms until the last weeks of the campaign, when Helms's forces mailed 125,000 postcards to voters warning them that they could be prosecuted for Fraud if they voted improperly. At least 44,000 cards were sent to black voters, according to the U.S. Department of Justice, which sent observers to the state to ensure fair elections. Helms edged out Gantt by just over 100,000 votes. In 1992, the Justice Department ruled that the Helms campaign had violated federal Civil Rights and voting laws by intimidating, threatening, and discouraging African Americans from voting. Helms's office denied that he was involved in the mailings.

Now, the situation with the Black Panthers is that they are standing there with batons...are they intimidating? Sure. Can their lawyer make the case that they were there to protect black voters and therefor had no intent to intimidate white voters? You bet your ass any half-decent lawyer can. I've seen the video and I didn't see any of them having a conversation voters going and out. Did I miss something?

The justice department has a good track record of suing only when it is fairly certain it has a great chance of winning. It only takes one juror to say not guilty and I can assure you they would have gone free. Plus you have to think about saving taxpayers the cost...won't anybody think of the deficits and the children?