Skip to comments.
Supreme Court allows Arizona voter ID law
Washington Post ^
| Friday, October 20, 2006; 6:07 PM
| Reuters
Posted on 10/23/2006 5:33:12 PM PDT by GilGil
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Friday that Arizona may require voters to present proof of citizenship when registering to vote and identification when they cast their ballots in the November 7 elections...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: checkbreakingnews; voteridlaw; welcometolastweek
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
Now all the other states whose voter ID laws have been struck down should immediately appeal in time for the elections. Awesome!
1
posted on
10/23/2006 5:33:15 PM PDT
by
GilGil
To: GilGil
Can I ululate now in celebration????
2
posted on
10/23/2006 5:38:56 PM PDT
by
bordergal
(John)
To: GilGil
Good Deal.. Not holding my breathe waiting for NJ to adopt it.
To: GilGil
Very nice of the Court to "allow" the desires of citizens expressed in valid elections.
4
posted on
10/23/2006 5:40:30 PM PDT
by
glorgau
To: GilGil
Now all the other states whose voter ID laws have been struck down should immediately appeal in time for the elections. Awesome
wont happen in CA where the state is investigating warning letters sent out by somebody saying that immigrants who are residing illegally vote they are going to be deported which paraphrased the illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, making it a federal crime for non-citizens to vote in any federal election (or state election, unless authorized by state law) enacted by Congress. Arnold has called the letters a hate crime, Sen Kennedy has asked the Justice department for a probe demanding the person who sent the letters to be prosecuted and the Republican party has even come out publicly against these warnings.
5
posted on
10/23/2006 5:40:30 PM PDT
by
seastay
To: GilGil
Hey, that's good news for all.....
Every Republican candidate in the country should bring this up between now and the election.
And I am all in favor on non-Arizona states running ads citing the ruling to keep the rest of the illegals away form their illegal acts on election day...
Great Job SCOTUS...
Regards,
Joe
6
posted on
10/23/2006 5:41:33 PM PDT
by
Sonar5
(62 Million+ have Spoken Clearly - "We Want Our Country Back")
To: GilGil
Pole Tax!! (/lib spin)
I'm voting absentee, so I guess that postage cost is a pole tax too.
7
posted on
10/23/2006 5:41:43 PM PDT
by
Mark
(REMEMBER: Mean spirited, angry remarks against my postings won't feed even one hungry child.)
To: GilGil
Yeah! It would cut alot of votes out of California!
It is a great day for America!
8
posted on
10/23/2006 5:42:33 PM PDT
by
oneamericanvoice
(We don't need no stinking tacos!)
To: Mark
9
posted on
10/23/2006 5:43:10 PM PDT
by
Mark
(REMEMBER: Mean spirited, angry remarks against my postings won't feed even one hungry child.)
To: GilGil
It's like seeing your new Cadillac go over a cliff with your mother-in-law driving it.
I like the idea that the SCOTUS ruled in favor of IDs. At the same time I'm sorry to see us come to the point where we have to identify ourselves to government.
Remember when: who I am, where I'm going, what I'm doing is none of the government's business.
To: GilGil
A big win for the good guys!!!
11
posted on
10/23/2006 5:46:44 PM PDT
by
FormerLib
(Sacrificing our land and our blood cannot buy protection from jihad.-Bishop Artemije of Kosovo)
To: Mark
No, they make the Poles pay postage too.
12
posted on
10/23/2006 5:47:28 PM PDT
by
FormerLib
(Sacrificing our land and our blood cannot buy protection from jihad.-Bishop Artemije of Kosovo)
To: GilGil
I suspect an immediate appeal would be heard for those cases where the laws exactly matched the Arizona law. Otherwise the legislatures will have to rewrite and pass new legislation that conforms to the SCOTUS decision.
To: GilGil
14
posted on
10/23/2006 5:55:22 PM PDT
by
stephenjohnbanker
(Our troops will send all of the worlds terrorists to hell in a handbasket with no virgins!)
To: GilGil
This is a good ruling for the upcoming election. Hopefully SCOTUS will leave it stand.
The justices cautioned that they were not issuing a ruling on the constitutionality of Arizona's law. "As we have noted, the facts in these cases are hotly contested," the court said in an unsigned five-page order. Indeed, the court said it would review the legal challenge to Arizona's Proposition 200, approved by the state's voters in 2004. The law requires voters to prove citizenship when registering to vote and to show photo IDs when they go to the polls. The law was meant to make sure illegal immigrants weren't casting ballots.
AZCentral article..... Gannett media so can only link A few more details are included.
15
posted on
10/23/2006 5:58:45 PM PDT
by
deport
(The Governor, The Foghorn, The Dingaling, The Joker, some other fellar...... The Governor Wins)
To: GilGil
"The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Friday that Arizona may require voters to present proof of citizenship when registering to vote and identification when they cast their ballots in the November 7 elections..."The operative word is may.
I prefer will.
16
posted on
10/23/2006 6:45:06 PM PDT
by
Cobra64
(Why is the War on Terror being managed by the DEFENSE Department?)
To: GilGil
Now all the other states whose voter ID laws have been struck down should immediately appeal in time for the elections. Awesome!Wanna bet?
17
posted on
10/23/2006 6:46:51 PM PDT
by
Cobra64
(Why is the War on Terror being managed by the DEFENSE Department?)
To: GilGil
18
posted on
10/23/2006 6:53:53 PM PDT
by
GarySpFc
(Jesus on Immigration, John 10:1)
To: GilGil
Woo-hoo! I would love to see this in CA. In 2004, when I offered my driver's license as an ID at the poll, the lady said I didn't need ID to vote. I said 'You're kidding'. Sadly, she wasn't. It's the only way to keep the voting honest.......the honor system doesn't work here.
To: originalbuckeye
Hell, in California we were given written instructions from a prior Attorney General that it was actually ILLEGAL for us to even ask prospective voters if they were citizens when registering them!!! It was unbelievable for the CRP wouldn't allow us to go out and register voters unless we agreed that we weren't going to ask people whether or not they were citizens (even though it was the second line on the entire form and right before it said that it was a felony to register to vote if you weren't eligible) because the CRP didn't want to get accused of being racists.
20
posted on
10/23/2006 7:50:25 PM PDT
by
bpjam
(Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaida - The Religion of Peace)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson