Posted on 01/23/2017 10:21:25 AM PST by ColdOne
The Supreme Court said Monday it will not hear an appeal of a lower court’s ruling striking down a Texas law requiring voters to show photo identification at the polls, effectively killing one of the strictest such laws in the nation.
The law, passed in 2011, required voters to show one of seven acceptable forms of photo identification at the polls, including a driver’s license, a passport, a permit to carry a concealed handgun or an election identification certificate. Voters could only obtain an election identification certificate, a form of identification provided to those who don't have a license, if they provided a copy of their birth certificate.
Any voter without an identification would have been allowed to cast a provisional ballot, which would have counted only if they showed an identification at a county office within six days after an election.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
This is a win...
Won’t be long now when Trump’s SCOTUS jurist gets in...
Path to a banana republic.
How? They struck it down
How?................
How so?
#2, How is it a win?
splain please
The same way 'weakness is strength' ?
How is that a win. The lower court struck it down
rewrite the law and try again
Democrats are terrified of voter ID.
How about requiring a fingerprint scan for anyone voting without a government-issued ID? That could do wonders for discouraging vote fraud while improving poll access . . . except for criminals who might not want to cooperate with either option.
Just read the article. Case was remanded with a hearing set for next month.
It’s not over.
The 5th Circuit decision remanded the case back to a federal district court in Texas, where a new hearing will be held next month.
I hope the appeal gets through the supreme Court gantlet.
Yes, that is the case but the Hill tried to twist it to another meaning.
“The Supreme Court’s decision not to accept the case means that the lower court’s decision striking down the ID law stands”
“The 5th Circuit decision remanded the case back to a federal district court in Texas, where a new hearing will be held next month.”
Note that SCOTUS did not rule, they merely refused to hear at this time, presumably because the court would be deadlocked and so the time spent hearing the case would be wasted.
Going forward means that the lower court can once again rule against the TX law in which case TX can appeal directly to SCOTUS once a new Supreme Justice is in place.
I see this as a temporary setback with TX ultimately prevailing.
Good grief, all one needs is a birth certificate to get an election card and they’re good to go. There is no reason for the law not to be in effect. But one can bet it will be in effect in the next year, in time for 2018 midterms.
So the lower court claims 600,000 real citizens of Texas have no access to a legal birth certificate? Bravo Sierra.
Only people who entered the US illegally would have no access to a birth certificate.
Without a birth certificate, one cannot have a driver’s license, passport, buy liquor or cigarettes, or have access to government handouts. And we are to believe that 600,000 legal citizens in Texas have no birth certificate???
Bravo Sierra.
Because if they took it and it ended in a tie then the lower ruling would have wider reach. This way it stays local
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.