Posted on 10/18/2014 10:24:45 AM PDT by Steelfish
October 18, 2014 Supreme Court Weighs In On Controversial Voter ID Law
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court said Saturday that Texas can use its controversial new voter identification law for the November election.
A majority of the justices rejected an emergency request from the Justice Department and civil rights groups to prohibit the state from requiring voters to produce certain forms of photo identification in order to cast ballots. Three justices dissented.
Voter ID laws in the spotlight as midterm elections near The law was struck down by a federal judge last week, but a federal appeals court had put that ruling on hold. The judge found that roughly 600,000 voters, many of them black or Latino, could be turned away at the polls because they lack acceptable identification. Early voting in Texas begins Monday.
The NAACP Legal Defense Fund played a key role in the case. The group's president, Sherrilyn Ifill, believes that the widespread voter fraud that the law is intended to fight is a myth.
"I think this lays bare this myth about what voter ID is really premised on," she told CBS News after last week's ruling. "It's premised on a disenfranchisement scheme and not on protecting the ballot."
The Supreme Court's order was unsigned, as it typically is in these situations. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented, saying they would have left the district court decision in place.
"The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters," Ginsburg wrote in dissent.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
As I posted in another thread, we need to replicate this law in every other state the way it was done in Texas. Immediately and with the highest priority.
I bet every last one has good enough ID to cash a check.
Purposefully?
V. An agenda that makes your rights so much chopped liver.
Some good news out from the SC!
All these minorities they whine about probably have some kind of id.
How else do they getsmedat?
They want illegals to vote
The whole “poll tax” thing is such a cheap cop-out. But repeatedly, it’s a cheap cop-out at very high levels of the judiciary. Voter registrations will take literally any sort of ID, it doesn’t have to be anything better than a library card, a supermarket card. Yes, I know those don’t have photos on them, but voter reg doesn’t require a passport or drivers’ license that the poor, very arguably may not have or need nor be able to afford.
But every state provides for some means of photo ID for free. It’s like the part of their brain that cannot help but scream “poll tax” cannot simultaneously recognize that free photo ID is widely available.
and to buy booze and cigarettes...
or are we to believe that all those hundreds of thousands of folk don't drink or smoke because they can't 'afford' an ID ...they'd surely be hollering up a storm if that were the case...
NC and Florida has the same exact law as I recall...wonder what happens?
The idea that a person should prove that they are indeed the person on the list, is controversial only to a liberal.
This problem is easily solved. If somebody doesn’t have an ID, and is officially in poverty, give them an ID for free.
Liberals keep saying it costs money to get legal.documents in order to get an ID. Give these so called poor a free ID then. Then the liberals can’t claim that paying fees to get an ID is poll tax.
The claim that 600,000 people in Texas don't have photo ID is a myth.
“purposefully discriminatory” is unadulterated BS.
If it turns out later they have committed vote fraud, then throw them into prison for 20 years.
I wonder how many people who claim that don't have photo ID will suddenly remember that they do?
The dissent is not based on law, but on political aspiration, for it is illegal voters who put, and keep, the likes of the dissent in office.
Back in an earlier time I watched a “disadvantaged” neighborhood on election day. No buses picking up people, few people going to the polls, basically nothing going on. But then a HUGE turnout. I looked back at the voter roles from that area and found single-family houses with 14 ‘people’ registered and most having ‘voted’ in prior elections.
Pretty obvious what was going on, even then. The get-out-the-vote effort involved proxy voting for most of the people in those houses...people that never existed. This was done during quiet times, during early voting. That was why True-The-Vote people that were exercising their LEGAL RIGHT to monitor the voting were forcibly ejected from those precincts, and then got audited by the IRS. Most rank-and-file Democrats, even blacks, don’t know how this works, which is why they don’t have a problem with Voter ID. But the ones that do know the system have to fight it tooth-and-nail, because, for now, there’s no easy workaround, even if you only have your people ‘guarding’ the machines.
The Dems gambled and lost here. In Texas, at least, if there’s no ID, there’s no vote. There has to be an ID number entered for every vote. Obviously most of those 14 people in that house (i.e., non-existent people) don’t have an associated ID. It’s game over with that scheme.
They delayed as long as they could. They don’t even have enough time to organize a traditional (i.e., legal) get-out-the-vote effort. They’re screwed.
They were counting on this hack judge to make it impossible to have the ruling reversed before the election, and were hoping that Obama would have been able to pack the Supreme Court by now, just in case it did get overturned on appeal. Didn’t happen. We’ll soon get to see what a CLEAN ELECTION looks like here.
“The claim that 600,000 people in Texas don’t have photo ID is a myth.”
I suspect that Holder and hacks compared the voter roles to the state ID list...and guess what: 600,000 people on the voter roles didn’t show up on the ID list.
I would not be surprised if nearly everyone of those 600,000 people exist ONLY on voter roles. In other words they are not people, but were intended to “cast votes” anyway. You cannot disenfranchise a non-person.
Who asked for their opinions? Answer: the leftist media.
You mean like where people don’t line up alphabetically outside the polls to vote?
What are the particulars on the absentee PhotoID?
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.