Posted on 09/12/2014 3:31:14 PM PDT by mandaladon
The State of Wisconsin can enforce a new voter identification law in this November's election, a federal appeals court said Friday.
After hearing arguments on the issue earlier in the day, a three-judge panel of the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals unanimously stayed a district court judge's order blocking enforcement of the new Wisconsin law or any similar measure imposing new voter identification requirements.
"Having read the briefs and heard oral argument, this court now stays the injunction issued by the district court. The State of Wisconsin may, if it wishes (and if it is appropriate under rules of state law), enforce the photo ID requirement in this November’s elections," the appeals court wrote in a order released Friday afternoon (and posted here). "The district court held the state law invalid, and enjoined its implementation, even though it is materially identical to Indiana’s photo ID statute, which the Supreme Court held valid in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board" in 2008, the 7th Circuit added.
The state had asked the appeals court to lift the district judge's order, arguing that it was overbroad. Civil rights groups challenging the measure could ask for relief from the full bench of the 7th Circuit or from the U.S. Supreme Court.
The appeals court said Friday that a Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling in July narrowed the new law in ways that made it less likely to have a negative impact on minorities. "This reduces the likelihood of irreparable injury, and it also changes the balance of equities and thus the propriety of federal injunctive relief," the 7th Circuit wrote.
The move is also a rebuff to the the Obama Administration, which filed an amicus brief in July urging the appeals court to uphold the lower' court's ruling.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
I don’t understand why we keep having lawsuits over voter ID laws when the Supreme Court has already upheld such a law.
Does the concept of legal precedent only apply in cases which are approved of by liberals? What the heck is happening?
because they attempt to argue it from different angles. laws that have differences, they try to argue the differences. or attempt to declare it invalid for a different reason other than what was in the previous case.
splitting hairs essentially.
There are over 23 states with voted ID laws. By now there should be case files over a mile high showing “disenfranchised” or “voter suppression”, where are they?
Voter ID makes it more difficult to commit voter fraud.That is reason enough for liberals,socialists, and Democrats to oppose it. Yes, I know that was three names for one group of people.
Freep Mail me if you want on, or off, this Wisconsin interest ping list.
I said it here, first.
That is part of the suppression - concealing all the incidents of voter suppression. Its all just part of keepin' em down.
Might be worth tuning in the Madison lame evening news just to see the news readers squirm.
That horrid Christine Bellport (NBC 15) must be very very unhappy about this. She is bound to say something stupid, like when she dissed everyone who loves Duck Dynasty. I forget her other gaffe that made quite a thud, but it was more serious.
That’s what I think too.
I won’t believe this is for real until they ASK For my ID on Nov.4.
I think there will be an “emergency” stay put on this courtesy of the muslim Ishmael Ozanne, the DA in Madison.
I don’t think a stay can be put on a 7th Circuit ruling by a federal judge. Can someone with more knowledge of the law assist here?
Good.
They are so suppressed that can’t even sue. Duh. /s
Any one else?
CA....
WI goes Red State.
Oh gee, you mean a COURT let the legislature LEGISLATE??
Damn. It is a BANNER day in America!
Bad news for their plan to steal the election from Governor Walker.
Some SANITY....FINALLY!!
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.