Posted on 10/15/2014 3:07:43 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Arkansas' highest court on Wednesday struck down a state law that requires voters to show photo identification before casting a ballot, ruling the requirement unconstitutional just days before early voting begins for the Nov. 4 election.
In a decision that could have major implications in the state's election, the state Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that determined the law unconstitutionally added a requirement for voting.
The high court noted that the Arkansas Constitution lists specific requirements to vote: that a person be a citizen of both the U.S. and Arkansas, be at least 18 years old, and be lawfully registered. Anything beyond that amounts to a new requirement and is therefore unconstitutional, the court ruled.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
With all due respect to the judges, this is twisted (deliberately?) logic. Noting that the four voting protections amendments, 15, 19, 24, 26, are expressed as prohibitions on state powers, the bottom line is that the states have never amended the Constitution to prohibit themselves from requiring candidate voters to show a valid ID before being allowed to vote.
This was a decision of the Arkansas Supreme Court interpreting the Arkansas constitution. It's not appealable to federal court.
Nah, it’s the Arkansas constitution.
State Justices decided that the intent was to ONLY have these requirements.
Don’t know if they were correct but there is a general rule in constitutional law that specificity is exclusive (or something like that).
Doesn’t sound all that specific to me.
“that a person be a citizen of both the U.S. and Arkansas”
And without Id how can that be proved? There is nothing constitutional about proving what the law states. Only Leftists could view this any other way.
In fact if we go by this logic then a 10 year old can register and vote and registration form can not ask for any verification of facts- Nor can what ever anyone writes on a registration form even be challenged. Do so would be UN-constitutional.
So according to the court even a child can vote. You are not allowed to prove they are 18 or above. You are not allowed to prove they are US citizen or member of the state.
Insanity is the only rule of law anymore.
Sign the voting book? That sounds like an additional requirement.
"Anything beyond that amounts to a new requirement and is therefore unconstitutional, the court ruled."
But the italicized statement above from the OP doesn't mean that a new, non-constitutionally enumerated requirement is unlawful.
Timing is everything. The opposition always pulls a sympathetic judge to make a ruling weeks before an election, It sure happened in Pa. (back in 2012) and 2 or 3 states this year...
Then how have we had so many decisions overriding state courts on such thing as gay (pretend) marriage?
Why should I offer such onerous forms just to buy (formerly) controlled substances, booze, or ammo, or to sit in on political events?
Why should I even require a driver's license with a photo on it when I might want to go cruising in my burka?
For that matter, why be required to claim "Mr." or "Ms." when I can think and up any number of "other" self realizing tags?
Why complicate matters with all those racial, ethnic, and gender titles when "victim" and "evil oppressor" cover all the necessary categories?
There is no rationale to oppose voter ID, none. They even give free ids to homeless people. It’s a naked admission that they get illegal votes.
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.