AJC on Voter ID

Here’s the story.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that states may require voters to produce a photo identification, upholding a Republican-backed law similar to Georgia’s aimed at deterring voter fraud.

Opponents who contend Georgia’s law places an unfair burden on voters say they will continue to pursue legal challenges. But the high court’s 6-3 ruling approving Indiana’s photo ID requirement makes it far more difficult for them to prevail.

One comment

  1. Goldwater Conservative says:

    The majority opinion also noted, as did the attorneys involved in the suit, that if there were proof as to how many people were denied their voting rights…it may have tipped their decision.

    The court probably will not overturn the law if a few dozen, or even a couple of hundred, names could be produced. If numbers in the thousands can be produced,…then it is likely that the opinion would be different.

    I suspect that these lawsuits may cool down until we have a new president. The Georgia law only received approval from the USDOJ after the AG over-rode the decision by the civil rights division that the law did put poor minorities and the elderly at a disadvantage. The determinants were only partisan in the AGs decision. Chances are this will be the case even with a Democratic president and AG.

    Under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and subsequent administrative rulings and such…if the law can be turned over in the courts and on the watch of a “friendly” (democratic) president, the rules will be written by the courts rather than a partisan installed SoS and majority republican state legislature. At least in GA. Indiana is not covered by Section 5 of the VRA’65.

    It is about time that we put together an independent commission to decide our election laws. This id act would have been implemented much better and I doubt any controversy would stem when the commission requires that the state foot the bill and issue all ids immediately with out the voter’s request.

Comments are closed.