this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
266 points (99.6% liked)

News

36782 readers
2344 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Alabama says a new state law expanding the list of felonies that cause a person to lose their right to vote won’t be enforced until after the November election and asked a judge to dismiss a lawsuit over the effective date.

The Alabama attorney general office wrote in a Friday court filing that the new law, which has a Oct. 1 effective date, cannot be used to block people from voting in the upcoming election, because the Alabama Constitution prohibits new election laws from taking effect within six months of the general election.

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] snooggums@midwest.social 61 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

No citizen lose the right to vote, ever, for any reason other than no longer being a citizen.

[–] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Election related crimes should result in disenfranchisement. People who gerrymander districts shoujd be barred from voting or holding public office.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 47 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Nope, they, too, should be allowed to vote. We shouldn't allow any path to disenfranchisement.

[–] thefartographer@lemm.ee 18 points 2 years ago (1 children)

What about the dead? Call me controversial, but I'd like to disenfranchise the dead

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 22 points 2 years ago

Okay, call me slightly ableist.

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

Treason, voter fraud at scale, insurrection/coup seem like good reasons. Anything short of that seems ridiculous.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 56 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Seems fair. If the candidate can be a felon, why not the voter?

[–] esc27@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

This looks like a massive own goal for the Alabama GOP. The relevant state constitution amendment was pushed through in response to covid 19 and they way many states improved voting access during the worst of the pandemic.

It was supposed to make it harder to expand voting access but now (briefly) did the opposite. Not that it matters much on a deep red state.

[–] ulkesh@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

To the people saying there should be no reason to lose the right to vote. I do not agree. Treason -- this should absolutely bar their right to vote, if they are not sentenced to death. So be the absolutists all you'd like, but there is a line, and a fair due process and conviction of treason is it.

[–] mdwhite999@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I feel like there are 2 related arguments against this. One is that it could motivate political prosecution to disenfranchise people. The second is that it kind of creates a slippery slope, if treason disenfranchises you why not murder, or rape, or election fraud or whatever other crime someone considers serious enough

[–] ulkesh@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Anything can be used for political persecution/prosecution, that is not an argument to not do something.

And for your second argument, that’s exactly how it works in the US — felonies mean losing the vote. Not that I agree with it in all cases. And using slippery slope here is logically fallacious since I’m being specific to a single cause pointing to a single effect, whereas you’re assuming such an effect will then create further causes to it.

The point is that due process is supposed to protect against phony charges. So to me, at minimum, a conviction of treason, with fair due process, is not at all a slippery slope. And since treason is the ultimate anti-patriotic criminal act a citizen could commit, and once convicted and upheld through appeal, they should no longer be allowed to vote in the country they betrayed.

Thus, I refute the absolutists, hence my post.

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

So after having served your scentence, this law instates an additional penalty retroactively. Seems fair.