US Supreme Court Endorses Voter Suppression
The US Supreme Court says the Indiana voter photo-ID law is a good idea.
Is that wailing I hear outside my window today's 30 mile-per-hour wind, or the sound the state GOP makes when it realizes that losing the State Senate cut them out of installing such a law here?
Glad to see that the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel agrees the Supreme Court ruling was unjustified.
The decision was a little more complicated than that. I believe there were 5 different briefs written.
"The conclusion reached by the Court as a whole is that the law may be unconstitutional as applied to a small number of voters who must incur cost in order to obtain the ID, but that since this case has no such voters as plaintiffs, it fails to reach that claim.
Indiana does not charge for an ID, so technically its not much different from a requirement of a "free voter registration card".
Certainly this does not come anywhere close to the tactics Illinois Dems used in the recent Presidential primary. Green Party ballots were hidden, thrown away, and existence denied to prevent voters from excersizing their right to vote.
In 2004, the Democratic National Committee used resources that could have been used to fight Bush, to keep Nader tied up in the courts and off the ballot.
It seems to me that while Republicans do try to suppress the vote, they are still in the minor leagues. They never call the crap the Dems do with their Lib spoilers.
You can't call it "voter suppression" when there is no evidence that votes have been suppressed. Even the liberal justice on the bench recognizes that.
It is voter suppression because it is not to encourage voting, but to impose barriers.
The courts should make voting easy, not difficult.
And it allegedly fixes a problem that doesn't really exist.
Okay, if you're sticking to "voter suppression", I'll stick to my original moniker of "voter cheating". The Indiana law will prevent voter cheating and the SCOTUS affirmed it.
Post a Comment