Posted on 10/18/2014 4:34:03 PM PDT by Enlightened1
The Supreme Court on Saturday allowed Texas to use its strict voter identification law in the November election. The court’s order, issued just after 5 a.m., was unsigned and contained no reasoning.
(Excerpt) Read more at mobile.nytimes.com ...
I’m surprised the Slimes didn’t describe it as “racist.”
Oh, Please! The only people who “can’t obtain the required documents” are people who can’t obtain the required documents for a damn good reason - THEY AREN’T CITIZENS, THEY AREN’T PERMANENT TEXAS RESIDENTS, OR THEY ARE DEAD!!!
Ruth Buzzy Ginsberg, the Wise Latina and The Hog just make crap up as they go along.
Every time I go to vote (In Arkansas)I have to show my driver’s license to show I am who I am, even though the poll workers know me.
I have no problem with that.
“Last Mexican election, To vote, the citizen had to show the gov’t issued ID.”
If Mexican elections are legitimate, then Mexicans are more
screwed up than I thought. No wonder the Obama loves them,
they are the perfect morons for the democrat base.
So how did they word their legislation so differently to gain approval?
That's the question, isn't it.
Same here. In fact, it is a moment of civic pride for me.
They didn’t change the wording of the legislation. A lib federal judge declared the law unconstitutional, a poll tax. The TX Attorneys General requested an emergency stay of the order, in order to appeal, and SCOTUS told the lib fed judge, 6 to 3, to go pound sand.
If Mexican elections are legitimate, then Mexicans are more
screwed up than I thought. No wonder the Obama loves them,
they are the perfect morons for the democrat base.
Hit to all states. Copy this one word for word.
Happy for Texas. Wisconsin SURE could’ve used that this time around for our upcoming Governor’s race, but, alas, it will not be.
Thanks for the boost! I’m not a techie, just a gramma.
Well, looks like seven generations of Democrats won’t be voting this Texas election...
I love the word “allowed”...
IIRC, we voted on this a while back and it was approved dispite a lot of liberal opposition, similar to what we see now coming from the usual suspects...
When I heard the Obama Judge down toward the valley here in Texas ruled in favor of “another” halt to using this law in the conduct of our elections, I kinda guffawed and decided I was going to ask and instruct my clerks to continue asking for definitive government issued photo ID...
Whats funny...Those that might have chosen to NOT show that kind of proof would still vote if they wanted to...Provisionally...That IS an accepted way to vote...
Whether it is even counted is up to the review board at the county level...out of my hands...
But this is just the way I roll...You know, rule of law stuff...Call me crazy...
Why doesn’t this also cover Wisconsin?
Can someone explain to me how Texas won and Wisconsin lost? I thought the whole idea was that in Wisconsin they didn’t say the law was illegal but they had a problem with the absentee ballots. Did Texas publish the correct language on them or what’s the deal?
Supposedly, the way they ruled, Wisconsin CAN get Voter ID AFTER this election due to the time frame and the confusion on the ballots, brought about by our DELIGHTFUL Government Accountability Board.
*Rolleyes*
It’s BS, of course. And why did they do it? Because they can!
http://fox11online.com/2014/10/20/van-hollen-abandons-any-hope-of-voter-id-for-now/
Very disappointing for Wisconsin. Why wouldn’t Wisconsin have been under the same ruling as Texas was?
Thank you SCOTUS! You do have _some_ courage and law left in some of you.
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.