Oldham wrote: “The preclearance proceedings involving Texas’s voter-identification law illustrate the enormous burdens of the section 5 regime…. Oldham not only defended the discriminatory Texas photo ID law, he also advanced the extreme argument that Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act – the heart of this historic federal civil rights law – should be invalidated. Oldham wrote that “for nearly two years, the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice has used every weapon in its arsenal to thwart the implementation of a law that this Court has recognized as a legitimate and constitutional fraud-prevention measure.” Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division for declining to preclear the discriminatory Texas photo ID law under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The Court further holds that SB 14 constitutes an unconstitutional poll tax.” The district court ruling was upheld by the conservative Fifth Circuit.
![fifth circuit court of appeals judge fifth circuit court of appeals judge](https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/949742/Dwight_D_Opperman_Foundation_Chief_Judge_Carl_E_Stewart.jpg)
A federal district judge subsequently struck down this law, holding that “SB 14 creates an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote, has an impermissible discriminatory effect against Hispanics and African-Americans, and was imposed with an unconstitutional discriminatory purpose. Oldham vigorously defended Texas’s discriminatory photo ID law, SB 14. Oldham defended the use of photo ID laws in a 2013 Supreme Court amicus brief he filed on behalf of Texas in the case Shelby County v. As deputy solicitor general in Texas, Mr. One such barrier in recent years has been the passage of photo ID laws. Throughout our nation’s history, African Americans and other marginalized communities have faced systemic barriers to accessing the ballot. Worked to Restrict Voting Rights: The right to vote is foundational to our democracy. Oldham is a conservative ideologue who would not be a fair-minded jurist and should not be given a lifetime appointment on the federal judiciary – an appointment which, given his age, could span half a century. He has worked to restrict voting rights and other critical civil rights including immigrant rights and women’s health, as well as seeking to undermine environmental protection and gun safety. But despite being just 13 years out of law school and barely clearing the American Bar Association’s minimum years of practice standard to be rated qualified, he has done significant damage to civil and human rights during his short career. Oldham is one of the youngest people ever nominated for a federal circuit court judgeship. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.Īt age 39, Mr. The mandate at issue here is anything but a ‘delicate exercise’ of this ‘extraordinary power.On behalf of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a coalition of more than 200 national organizations committed to promoting and protecting the civil and human rights of all persons in the United States, I write in strong opposition to the confirmation of Andrew Oldham to the U.S.
![fifth circuit court of appeals judge fifth circuit court of appeals judge](https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/AP_19074794524922-768x526.jpg)
“The reason for the rarity of this form of emergency action is simple,” Engelhardt went on, adding that courts and OSHA itself have agreed “for generations” that such orders constitute “extraordinary power” which must be “delicately exercised, and only in those emergency situations which require it.” While OSHA does have the power to issue what’s known as an “emergency temporary standard,” or ETS, the judge observed that only a single standard has survived legal scrutiny since the agency was founded in the 1970s. Friday’s ruling reaffirmed the pause, telling OSHA to “take no steps to implement or enforce the mandate until further court order.” Despite the first stay, the White House has continued to urge businesses to follow the vaccine dictate and effectively ignore the ruling, potentially setting up a battle in the Supreme Court. The appeals court issued its first stay on November 6 after a litany of plaintiffs – including a number of companies and several US states – challenged the move, conducting an expedited judicial review. The agency will require all workers at firms with more than 100 employees to be fully vaccinated against Covid-19 by early next year, or else test for the virus regularly and wear masks at all times while working. The Biden administration initially announced the requirement in September, with OSHA following up earlier this month with an emergency order to enforce the mandate.
![fifth circuit court of appeals judge fifth circuit court of appeals judge](https://thedmonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/circut-judges-scaled.jpg)
Read more White House tells Americans to IGNORE court hold on vaccine mandate