Reply #3: You could argue that, but you'd be wrong [View All]

[sangh0]

However, one could argue that the 14th amendment could be used to say that equal protection of the law is violated when a citizen is denied the right to vote for any reason whatsoever.

You could argue that, or you could argue that the moon is made of green cheese. In either case, you'd be wrong. WRT the voting argument, it is wrong for the reason the first responder points out - the privilege has been limited in a way that respects "due process"

And if voting is considered a privilege then it would be unconstitutional to deny to one group and grant it to another. Are there any holes in my logic?

Yes, the Constitution explicitly allows state govts to limit the privilege EXCEPT in a limited number of cases (ie race, sex, or to anyone over the age of 18....) IOW, as long as the reason for limiting the right/privilege is not one of the specific reasons that have been prohibited, and the limit was implemented in a way that satisfies the "due process" requirement, then the Constitution has not been abrogated.