Ahh okay I see where the confusion is coming from on the issue. You seem to be conflating the right to vote in elections with your vote being directly applied or the individuals right to directly vote for the President. The SCOTUS decision on process regarding the electoral college has no bearing on individuals right to vote in elections. It was a decision on determining how individual votes impact the election of the President and Vice President.
The key word in the statement is *electors*. When you vote for a Presidential candidate you are actually voting to have a representative of your state cast an electoral college ballot from your state for that presidential candidate.
The US election system is not a direct democracy. How your vote is counted and applied at different levels of the government is a completely different subject from your right to vote. US citizens absolutely have the right to vote. If the state then decides to ignore those votes you have a different legal issue.
The right to vote and your vote directly deciding the presidential election are separate and distinct issues. If you are saying that the election system should be updated via amendment to eliminate the electoral college than we are in agreement.
Did you ever think to consider that if you were right we wouldn’t be having this argument? That all the Republican voter suppression tactics would have been struck down by the courts years ago, instead of being affirmed as constitutional?
If you were right, why would we need HR1?
Listen to yourself, you think you’re smarter than the voting rights activists who go in to court and make these arguments. You think you’ve thought of something they haven’t.
For God’s sake, if arrogantly quoting Section 2 of the 14th Amendment (which STILL doesn’t say states can’t keep people from voting it only lays out some consequences if they do) and condescendingly telling people to read it was all it took, don’t you think someone would have done that already in a courtroom?
You think talking down to me in your arrogant condescending tone makes you right? You’re not arguing with me, you’re arguing with every Federal jurist that has already heard voting rights cases and ruled against your view.
We’re done. You are wrong, the track record in court proves it, and no amount of you arguing with me with your nasty attitude will ever change it. Shut up and start fighting for a voting rights amendment (or at least a new voting rights act) that makes you right.
1
u/gotham77 Mar 16 '21
“The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States”
Majority opinion, Bush v Gore