BREAKING: Georgia Supreme Court Reinstates Voter ID Law

The case has been dismissed by the Georgia Supreme Court for lack of standing.

Essentially, this means the law is back on the books, though I suspect a new case will be refiled.

The last remaining plaintiff in the suit had a photo id when she filed suit and the Supreme Court held she lacked standing to file suit challenging the constitutionality of the law.

Thanks to Bill K. for the heads up.

11 comments

  1. Federalist says:

    Now, I am trying to figure out if this is just for State elections…seeing as how a Federal Appeals Court struck down the law.

  2. griftdrift says:

    Generally even federal elections are left to the control of the states, except for, oh wait a minute, what was that case? Bush vs somebody. I think the name sounds like Bore. Uh-oh…

  3. Federalist says:

    Damn, well…atleast there is time to appeal bring this to a higher court before the 2008 elections.

  4. ChuckEaton says:

    It’s hard to believe they couldn’t find the right person to properly represent the case as a plaintiff. They should call Kathy Cox or David Worley and get their list of 676,000 Georgians who are registered to vote but lack proper identification.

  5. Federalist says:

    Maybe I will just “lose” my license and refuse to pay for another one. Then maybe the court will allow me to have standing and file suit.

  6. Harry says:

    Federalist, you folks had your fun. You lined up your go-to judges and temporarily subverted the legislative branch, and enabled election day targeted knock-and-drag carried out by government workers on the public dime and other abuses. Now get out of the way.

  7. Federalist says:

    Had our fun? It is not a lot of fun litigating to ensure citizens that they will have an uninterrupted right and ability to vote. It costs a lot of money, and a lot of time. Just because the GOP does not want poor people to vote does not give them the right to think up creative ways to disenfranchise them.

  8. ChuckEaton says:

    Don’t you think it’s a little ironic that the Democrats have demagogued this issue referring to the “thousands of poor folks, senior citizens, and African Americans” who will be denied access to the voting booths and yet they can’t find anyone to represent the case as a plaintiff?

  9. Federalist says:

    I do not think that the problem is finding a plaintiff, I think it is ponying up the money.

  10. Harry says:

    They’ll find another friendly judge just before the next election, and start all over again with a plaintiff with standing. Wouldn’t surprise me a bit if the whole charade isn’t premeditated.

  11. Holly says:

    “The next election” is this week. As of today, voters are required to present a photo ID to vote in the special election to fill the 10th Congressional District and the 24th State Senate District because the law took effect immediately.

Comments are closed.