Christmas-Are you still telling little "white Lies" to so-called black c...

Moorish Music "Granada, The Last Stronghold," Epic New Song

Moorish Lesson-Olmec-Old Man Mecca Cartoon Teacher (NEW)

"The Build," (E.2) Murder of so-called blacks by Police In the U.S., the...

CHRISTMAS-FOR WHOM? DESTRUCTION OF MOORISH CIVILIZATION (NEW)

Murder of so-called blacks by Police In the U.S., the Solution. (Lecture)

Thanksgiving Origins of Slavery (New) Message to My Moorish Family!

Moorish Talk Show/News "The Build," Episode 1

Clif Soulo - Live from Planet Asia [Official Music Video]

"BLACKS," CITIZENSHIP AND NATIONALITY PART 2 (CH. 2 KEY POINTS DVD)

"The Build." (Trailer) Keeping Moor People Informed!

Young Moorish Sister Breaks Down Why Killings of "Blacks" Will Continue ...

 

Civil Rights Begins to Fade for so-called Blacks. What's Next?

Though The voter's right's act has been renewed until 2031, it seems that this apparent victory went quite undershadowed by the Supreme Courts decision to eliminate to most important part of the Act.
"The 2006 reauthorization renewed several key protections, providing for language assistance, Election Day monitors, and Justice Department pre-approval of voting changes. The protections are currently set to expire in 2031." http://www.civilrights.org/voting-rights/vra/

The pre approval voting changes spoken of in the quote above or "pre-clreance" was struck down by the supreme Court in 2013.

"The Supreme Court on Tuesday effectively struck down the heart of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by a 5-to-4 vote, freeing nine states, mostly in the South, to change their election laws without advance federal approval. The court divided along ideological lines, and the two sides drew sharply different lessons from the history of the civil rights movement and the nation’s progress in rooting out racial discrimination in voting. At the core of the disagreement was whether racial minorities continued to face barriers to voting in states with a history of discrimination." http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.html?pagewanted=all

Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court explaining why this pre-clearance section was unconstitutional and only meant to be an extreme and temporary solution.

"The Voting Rights Act of 1965 employed extraordinary measures to address an extraordinary problem. Section 5 of the Act required States to obtain federal permission before enacting any law related to voting—a drastic departure from basic principles of federalism. And §4 of the Act applied that requirement only to some States—an equally dramatic departure from the principle that all States enjoy equal sovereignty. This was strong medicine, but Congress determined it was needed to address entrenched racial discrimination in voting, “an insidious and pervasive evil which had been perpetuated in certain parts of our country through unremitting and ingenious defiance of the Constitution.” South Carolina v. Katzenbach,383 U. S. 301, 309 (1966) . As we explained in upholding the law, “exceptional conditions can justify legislative measures not otherwise appropriate.” Id., at 334. Reflecting the unprecedented nature of these measures, they were scheduled to expire after five years. See Voting Rights Act of 1965, §4(a), 79Stat. 438." http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/12-96#writing-12-96_OPINION_3
 

However, the Voters Right Act has been renewed repeatedly and the unconstitutional status of so-called blacks has been swept under the rug.

"The coverage formula and pre clearance requirement were initially set to expire after five years, but the Act has been reauthorized several times. In 2006, the Act was reauthorized for an additional 25 years, but the coverage formula was not changed. Coverage still turned on whether a jurisdiction had a voting test in the 1960s or 1970s, and had low voter registration or turnout at that time. Shortly after the 2006 reauthorization, a Texas utility district sought to bail out from the Act’s coverage and, in the alternative, challenged the Act’s constitutionality. This Court resolved the challenge on statutory grounds, but expressed serious doubts about the Act’s continued constitutionality. See Northwest Austin Municipal Util. Dist. No. One v. Holder, 557 U. S. 193." SHELBY COUNTY, ALABAMA v. HOLDER, ATTORNEY GENERAL, 679 F. 3d 848, reversed.

As a result of the Supreme Court ruling some states have begun to enact laws that work to the disadvantage of so-called blacks and minorities.

"1. TEXAS: Last year, a federal court rejected Texas’ voter ID law, calling it “the most stringent in the country.” The panel also rejected the state’s redistricting maps, finding that they protected white incumbents while altering districts with minority incumbents.
Wisconsin's Voter ID Law
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit charging that Wisconsin's voter ID law is unconstitutional and will deprive citizens of the right to vote, as provided under the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. A court struck down this law, but on September 12, 2014, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the voter ID law. Read more »
Ohio's Cut to Early Voting
The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Ohio filed a lawsuit asking a federal court to strike down a new state law and a directive from Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted that have slashed early voting opportunities in Ohio in advance of the 2014 election. On September 4, 2014, a federal judge ruled that cuts to early voting in Ohio must be restored in time for the 2014 federal midterm elections. Read more »
North Carolina's Voter Suppression Law
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of North Carolina Legal Foundation, and the Southern Coalition for Social Justice  filed a lawsuit challenging North Carolina's voter suppression law signed by Gov. Pat McCrory. The suit specifically targets provisions of the law that eliminate a week of early voting, end same-day registration, and prohibit "out-of-precinct" voting. Read more »
Kansas's Two-Tiered Voting System
The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Kansas filed a lawsuit challenging Kansas' two-tiered voter registration system. The complaint charges that eligible voters are being divided into separate and unequal classes, in violation of the Kansas Constitution's equal protection guarantees. Read more » "https://www.aclu.org/voting-rights
 

An Unconstitutional  Act

"Sections 4 and 5 were intended to be temporary; they were set to expire after five years. See §4(a), id., at 438; Northwest Austin, supra, at 199. In South Carolina v. Katzenbach, we upheld the 1965 Act against constitutional challenge, explaining that it was justified to address “voting discrimination where it persists on a pervasive scale.” 383 U. S., at 308.
In 1970, Congress reauthorized the Act for another five years, and extended the coverage formula in §4(b) to jurisdictions that had a voting test and less than 50 percent voter registration or turnout as of 1968. Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1970, §§3–4, 84Stat. 315. That swept in several counties in California, New Hampshire, and New York. See 28 CFR pt. 51, App. Congress also extended the ban in §4(a) on tests and devices nationwide. §6, 84Stat. 315.
In 1975, Congress reauthorized the Act for seven more years, and extended its coverage to jurisdictions that had a voting test and less than 50 percent voter registration or turnout as of 1972. Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1975, §§101, 202, 89Stat. 400, 401. Congress also amended the definition of “test or device” to include the practice of providing English-only voting materials in places where over five percent of voting-age citizens spoke a single language other than English. §203, id., at 401–402. As a result of these amendments, the States of Alaska, Arizona, and Texas, as well as several counties in California, Flor-ida, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, and South Da-kota, became covered jurisdictions. See 28 CFR pt. 51, App. Congress correspondingly amended sections 2 and 5 to forbid voting discrimination on the basis of membership in a language minority group, in addition to discrimination on the basis of race or color. §§203, 206, 89Stat. 401, 402. Finally, Congress made the nationwide ban on tests and devices permanent. §102, id., at 400.
In 1982, Congress reauthorized the Act for 25 years, but did not alter its coverage formula. See Voting Rights Act Amendments, 96Stat. 131. Congress did, however, amend the bailout provisions, allowing political subdivisions of covered jurisdictions to bail out. Among other prerequisites for bailout, jurisdictions and their subdivisions must not have used a forbidden test or device, failed to receive preclearance, or lost a §2 suit, in the ten years prior to seeking bailout. §2, id., at 131–133.
We upheld each of these reauthorizations against constitutional challenge. See Georgia v. United States, 411 U. S. 526 (1973) ; City of Rome v. United States, 446 U. S. 156 (1980) ; Lopez v. Monterey County, 525 U. S. 266 (1999) .
In 2006, Congress again reauthorized the Voting Rights Act for 25 years, again without change to its coverage formula. Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amend-ments Act, 120Stat. 577. Congress also amended §5 to prohibit more conduct than before. §5, id., at 580–581; see Reno v. Bossier Parish School Bd., 528 U. S. 320, 341 (2000) (Bossier II); Georgia v. Ashcroft, 539 U. S. 461, 479 (2003)
 

The 14 and 15th Amendment
"The 14th amendment  deals with "the Citizenship Clause, Privileges or Immunities Clause, Due Process Clause, and Equal Protection Clause. The Citizenship Clause provides a broad definition of citizenship, overruling the Supreme Court's decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which had held that Americans descended from African slaves could not be citizens of the United States. The Privileges or Immunities Clause has been interpreted in such a way that it does very little." online encyclopedia
The Fifteenth Amendment (Amendment XV) to the United States Constitution prohibits the federal and state governments from denying a citizen the right to vote based on that citizen's "race, color, or previous condition of servitude". Wikipedia

However, these so-called rights come with an expiration date and continues to be renewed over and over again. Also, "the broad definition of citizenship," is what has people believing they are true citizens while they are really an inclusion in this a deviant definition of citizen. Rights were effectively exchanged for privileges and immunities and so-called blacks were placed in a state of limbo, void of nationality, outside of the original constitutional fold.
Citizenship clause

Amendment XIV, Section 1, Clause 1:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
 

This clause nearly puts "blacks" under the jurisdiction of the United States Corporation and deeming it Citizenship. while at the same time equating Rights with Privileges and Immunities. This is why the Voter Rights Act was needed; to enforce this de facto form of Citizenship Rights. This is clear in the deserting remarks of Justice Ginsburg, with whom Justice Breyer, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan
"A century after the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments guaranteed citizens the right to vote free of discrimination on the basis of race, the “blight of racial discrimination in voting” continued to “infec[t] theelectoral process in parts of our country.” South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U. S. 301, 308 (1966) . Early attempts to cope with this vile infection resembled battling the Hydra. Whenever one form of voting discrimination was identified and prohibited, others sprang up in its place. This Court repeatedly encountered the remarkable “variety and persistence” of laws disenfranchising minority citizens. Id., at 311. To take just one example, the Court, in 1927, held unconstitutional a Texas law barring black voters from participating in primary elections, Nixon v. Herndon, 273 U. S. 536; in 1944, the Court struck down a “reenacted” and slightly altered version of the same law, Smith v. Allwright, 321 U. S. 649; and in 1953, the Court once again confronted an attempt by Texas to “circumven[t]” the Fifteenth Amendment by adopting yet another variant of the all-white primary, Terry v. Adams, 345 U. S. 461.
During this era, the Court recognized that discrimination against minority voters was a quintessentially political problem requiring a political solution. As Justice Holmes explained: If “the great mass of the white population intends to keep the blacks from voting,” “relief from [that] great political wrong, if done, as alleged, by the people of a State and the State itself, must be given by them or by the legislative and political department ofthe government of the United States.” Giles v. Harris, 189 U. S. 475, 488 (1903) ."
 

Keep in mind that all true Citizens are already guaranteed the right to vote. So-called blacks are not considered citizens because negro, black, colored, African-American are a cast label denoting a slave, not  nationalities.

"Dred Scott decision, formally Dred Scott v. John F.A. Sandford,  legal case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on March 6, 1857, ruled (7–2) that a slave (Dred Scott) who had resided in a free state and territory (where slavery was prohibited) was not thereby entitled to his freedom; that African Americans were not and could never be citizens of the United States…" Encyclopedia Britanica

So the Voters Rights Act was put in place temporarily to enforce the pseudo citizenship on the "black-slave" caste bestowed by the 14th and 15th Amendments. However, just as the Supreme Court Justiceses now deem the 4th and 5th sections of the Voters Rights Act unconstitutional, so do many states deem the 14th and 15th Amendments themselves unconstitutional. This is why as soon the Supreme Court Struck the pre clearance, they immediately went to work by initiating restrictive voting laws.

This is only the beginning and so-called blacks had better start to wrapping their minds around the concept of nationality and citizenship so that they may participate as all other nationalities in constitutional government as free men and women and not as a second class temporary status.