I’m not familiar with the law that the judge struck down, but did activist PA lawmakers possibly write the law using language that they knew would provoke any judge to strike it down? Or did the judge strike down the law because the judge is possibly an activist? Or did the judge justifiably strike down the law?
Next, note that the states have amended the Constitution to protect voting rights on the basis of race, sex, tax status and age as evidenced by the 15th, 19th, 24th and 26th Amendments. In other words, there is no constitutonal right which protects voters from not having to show a valid photo ID before voting. So the states can make constitutional laws which require voters to present valid photo ID before being allowed to vote.
Again, I don’t know the basis on which the judge struck down this law. And it’s getting too close to November for such laws to be struck down.
Remember, if patriots can elect a 2/3 conservative majority to both Houses of Congress in November then Congress will have the constitutional authority to repeal Obamacare without Obama’s signature.
I live in PA. The law was passed in March 2012.
But then it was blocked by judges in October 2012 from being used in the presidential election.
It was ruled in 2012 they could ask you for an ID but you could vote without one and wouldn’t have to use a provisional ballot.
Apparently now this judge wants to block it on a permanent basis?
It’s doubly frustrating considering I firmly believe PA was one of many states stolen from Romney in 2012.
Americans lack the ability to elect a two-thirds majority in both houses; I don’t think it is even mathematically possible.