Posted on 07/31/2014 9:04:47 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Thursday upheld a state law requiring voters to have photo identification to cast a ballot, although the law remains blocked by an earlier ruling by a federal judge that it is unconstitutional.
The court wrote in its decision that providing a photo identification at the ballot box does not create a substantial burden to the voter, as claimed by the plaintiffs in the case.
"Photo identification is a condition of our times where more and more personal interactions are being modernized to require proof of identity," the court wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Mexico’s national voter IDs part of culture
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012-01-22/mexico-national-voter-ID-cards/52779410/1
I don’t understand how a federal court can rule against this, when a Supreme Court case has already upheld voter I.D. laws. What is this other than a rogue court?
Halleluia! The Wis SC also upheld Act 10 which has saved taxpayers billions$$$.
FReep Mail me if you want on, or off, this Wisconsin interest ping list.
South Africa requires one as well.
judges have a severe tendency to egomania.
For example, when a ussc judge is asked about “repecting stare decisis” (prior cases); nominees give a meaningless yes. meaningless because the USSC is the one court that can TOTALY IGNORE prior cases.
Judges will make a rogue ruling because the KNOW not everyone can afford the whithering expense of an appeal. Appeals drag on and consume and destroy lives, bankrupt the innocent, and foster slap suits.
I don’t understand how a federal court can rule against this, when a Supreme Court case has already upheld voter I.D. laws. What is this other than a rogue court?
++++
Good question. We are rapidly approaching the complete politicization of the Judiciary. Three Branches Good, Two Branches Better - to coin, or steal, a phrase.
Wait until we get to One Branch Nirvana. That will be something to see - or to run from.
Adelman is a hack Dem pol who was appointed to the court in a move to get him out of the legislature so that the legislature could approve taxing communities to build the retractible domed Milwaukee Brewer's stadium. He has been a pain in the (you know what) ever since with his controversial rulings. LouD, do you have anything to add to that.
On the Vicki McKenna show right now..
http://www.newstalk1130.com/onair/vicki-mckenna-29300/
Great graphic! Love it!
The Federal court in this case upheld the law they didn’t rule against it.
Why all this fuss over voter ID? The problem is more basic than that. I mean, come on, clearly requiring that a voter have a name is an effort to disenfranchise those who don’t have one, or at least one they can spell.
Meaningless til the Feds weigh in.
“Win”. ..Not just yet unless the state reuling overrules the fed judges block.
“Win”. ..Not just yet unless the state reuling overrules the fed judges block.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.