Here is the Supreme Court opinion on Voting Rights http://t.co/BWKKEIHrhh
— Jamie Dupree (@jamiedupree) June 25, 2013
The Supreme Court has ruled that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act is toast.
Voting Rights Act's unconstitutional provisions finally found unconsitutional. But wait, it had such a nice name! #caring
— Kurt Schlichter (@KurtSchlichter) June 25, 2013
At first glance, Court's reasoning on preclearance remedy bodes ill for racial preferences next time they're up.
— Dan McLaughlin (@baseballcrank) June 25, 2013
Quick. Someone check on MSNBC’s Chris Hayes. And bring him a change of undies.
Holy crap.
— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) June 25, 2013
Aww. Second look at the offense of “judicial activism”? Yep:
One of the most stunning exercises in "judicial activism" ever.
— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) June 25, 2013
HAYES SMASH!
I am slightly surprised by how physically enraged I find myself.
— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) June 25, 2013
This is also devilishly clever, they can kill Section 5, by kicking the formula back to a congress that will never come up w a new one.
— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) June 25, 2013
Your tears of rage? Delicious!
"You wouldn't like me when I'm angry…"
RT @chrislhayes: I am slightly surprised by how physically enraged I find myself.— johnny dollar (@johnnydollar01) June 25, 2013
https://twitter.com/FigDrewton/status/349533254136770560
Kind of predictable that @chrislhayes would call rejection of a very outdated voting rights law "judicial activism." #LibMindset
— Michael Freeman (@michaelpfreeman) June 25, 2013
https://twitter.com/Beer__Wolf/status/349531609667608578
Wait. So leftists are pissed off that the Supreme Court isn't sticking to "policies of the past?" LOLOLOL
— RBe (@RBPundit) June 25, 2013
https://twitter.com/matthewhurtt/status/349531116820111360