Posted on 04/28/2008 7:15:07 AM PDT by Aristotelian
McCain=Amnesty=Destruction of this country as we know it. If amnesty passes, it won’t matter who is appointed to the SCOTUS.
LOL!
A similar law was passed in Arizona a few years ago, it probably helped in some areas. The voter fraud is ongoing, the left was committing voter fraud with early ballots, long before the law was passed.
I would prefer that all states go to the Photo ID requirement.
States That Request Photo ID
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Indiana
Louisiana
Michigan
South Dakota
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legismgt/elect/taskfc/voteridreq.htm
Never mind!
Mail In ballots is the Dems new strategy....don’t need no steenken picture ID with those!
Sorry, but the state has to do that on its own, and that's not going to happen. It's way too late. If I was you, I'd pack up and run away from that place asap. Don't be "the last white farmer in Zimbabwe".
FRegards,
LH
Crawford v. Marion County Election Bd. (.PDF file)
Writing the court's lead opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens said states have a ``valid interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.''The RATS will go apoplectic. This opens the door for Photo ID laws in every state :-)Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined Stevens in the majority. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and Stephen Breyer dissented.
(This isn't up yet on the SCOTUS website.)
If you stretch things far enough, you can come up with wild scenarios about how difficult it is to get the documentation.
Indiana however, adressed most of these, and has nearly 100 places where you can get the ID.
And the requirement is LESS than what it is to get a JOB...
fraudulent voters hardest hit
Will somebody please explain to me why minority races, poor people, and older persons would be less likely to vote if photographic ID’s are required at the polls.
I already understand how easy it must be for fraudulent votes to be cast, I just don’t get why anyone would object to the requirement for positive identification.
cant find the opinion on the cornell law school site yet, 3 of the usual suspects?
“cant find the opinion on the cornell law school site yet, 3 of the usual suspects?”
A PDF of the decision is HERE:
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/07-21.pdf
It would be no hardship for anyone to vote and have a thumb print taken at the same time.
You forgot your sarcasm tag....
From the AP article:
"Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter dissented.....
But in dissent, Souter said Indiana's voter ID law "threatens to impose nontrivial burdens on the voting rights of tens of thousands of the state's citizens.""...
More likely, imposes nontrivial burdens on those intent on cheating.
Yep.
Show up to the polling place.
Show your photo ID
It matches
You vote
Show up to the polling place
No photo ID?
No vote.
What’s the problem????
In most states, the DMV issues non-driving ID cards AT NO COST. The ruling in this case mentions that and the fact that Indiana is among those states that don't charge for said ID cards. The ruling even addresses the "initiative" issue, stating that obtaining the free ID cards requires no more effort than the act of voting.
That leaves just the birth certificate...
Or welfare. No one seems to have much trouble rounding up documentation for that.
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.