On Wednesday, Aug. 23, U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos, a Hispanic Democrat appointed by Obama, rejected a watered-down version of the voter ID law that was signed by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott earlier this year. Judge Ramos’ new ruling came three years after she struck down the earlier version of the law.
Ramos was recommended by Texas Democrats during Obama administration for the federal bench in the Southern District of Texas. She was also supported by Republican Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn, and confirmed by the U.S. Senate on August 2, 2011.
The ruling blocked Texas from enforcing its revamped voter identification law, claiming that the Texas state legislature’s attempt to loosen the law did not go far enough and still perpetuated discrimination against black and Hispanic voters.
It is difficult not to assume that a Democrat Hispanic judge who believes in affirmative action politics could be objective in this case. In April 2017, US District Judges Xavier Rodriguez (a Democrat appointed by GW Bush) and Orlando Garcia (a Democrat appointed by Clinton) overruled Judge Jerry Smith on the judicial panel, claiming that the map protected incumbent Republican candidates because it that did not create any new minority opportunity districts or enhance minority voting strength.
However, the real reason for the lawsuit by liberal Democrat minority groups is to create districts that are minority-dominant so they can win. LULAC, MALDEF, NAACP, and other racial oriented groups want to re-segregate and politically isolate Latinos and blacks into separate districts where race politics can be easily played.
Instead integrating minorities, Democrats want to “protect” their constituents by keeping them segregated under the thumbs of political bosses. Boss William Tweed in New York and George & Archer Parr in south Texas controlled their voters economically and closely monitored their votes while pandering to their race, ethnicity, and national origin.
This case is also another example of “legal discrimination” used by Democrats to maintain political control over minorities. Democrats are demanding minority voters be segregated using race as the basis. Old Democrat segregationists would be proud.
This decision by Judge Ramos is the latest round in a year-long court battle over the state’s voter ID rules. Texas could be forced to undergo federal oversight of its election procedures since the state is considered guilty until it proves its innocence under the Voting Rights Act.
Ultimately, this case should be struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court because 1) it is the right of states to draw up the districts, 2) Texas legislature which drew the districts is a reflection of all the voters of the state, both minority and non-minority, 3) race was not a consideration in the redrawing of the districts, 4) states should not have to prove their innocence, but rather the plaintiff should prove a state’s guilt, and 4) it is racial discrimination to segregate minorities into minority dominant districts.
It continues to appears an independent and integrated minority voter is the worst nightmare of Democrats.