High Court Poised For Voter ID Case

TBO.com ^ | 12/31/2007 | MARK SHERMAN

[devane617]

The dispute over Indiana's voter identification law that is headed to the Supreme Court next week is as much a partisan political drama as a legal tussle.

The mainly Republican backers of the law, including the Bush administration, say state-produced photo identification is a prudent measure to cut down on vote fraud - even though Indiana has never had a prosecution of the kind of fraud the law is supposed to prevent.

The opponents, mainly Democrats, view voter ID a modern-day poll tax that disproportionately affects poor, minority and elderly voters - who tend to back Democrats. Yet, a federal judge found that opponents of the law were unable to produce evidence of a single Indiana resident who had been barred from voting because of the law.

The Supreme Court, which famously split 5-4 in the case that sealed the 2000 presidential election for George Bush, will take up the Indiana law on Jan. 9, just as the 2008 presidential primaries are getting under way.

A decision should come by late June, in time to be felt in the November elections in Indiana and in Georgia, the other state with a strict photo ID requirement, as well as in a handful of other states.

The justices will be asked to decide whether the law is an impermissible attempt to discourage certain voters or a reasonable precaution among several efforts aimed at cutting down on illegal voting.

"There's more than a little bit of irony in going to the Supreme Court and asking them to rise above partisan politics in election cases," said Richard Hasen, an election law expert at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.

The court's decision in the disputed 2000 election is partly responsible for the ensuing increase in election-related lawsuits and the loss of confidence by some groups in the voting system, Hasen said. Yet, the other branches of government seem more politicized than ever, leaving the court as the best option despite the 2000 election dispute, he said.

Indiana argues that demands for identification are frequent in today's society, and producing a photo ID at polling places is hardly onerous.

"In light of such widespread demands for ... government-issued photo identification, it is almost shocking that in late 2007 Indiana can be characterized as even unusual in requiring it at the polls," the state said in its court filing.

The Bush administration maintains states need not wait for fraud to occur to take action to prevent it. "The state's interest in deterring voter fraud before it happens is evident from the monumental harm that can come from such fraud," the government said in its supporting brief.

The law's opponents counter that an ID may be just one card among many in most people's wallets, but some groups are far less likely to have them.

Homeless people wanting to vote might face the most difficulty under the law. While the state will provide a voter ID card free of charge to the poor, applicants still must have a birth certificate or other documentation to get the ID card.

[Calvin Locke]

Homeless people wanting to vote might face the most difficulty under the law.

More like social "workers" embezzling the votes of bums will have a more difficult time doing so.

[Thermalseeker]

I’ll still be damned if I ever have to show my ID to anyone to prove I’m a citizen and that I am eligible to vote.

Then, go into the polling place of your choice and tell them you have a right to vote in this upcoming Presidential election, by God, and see how far that takes you!

(Hint: you have no "right" to vote in Federal elections whatsoever. See the Constitution of the United States of America for details)

[MrB]

In reality, very few leftist arguments can be taken at face value,

because, if their true agenda were revealed, no one would support them.

This issue is about the Democrats’ ability to continue to commit vote fraud. There is no other reason to disallow the verification of eligibility of the voter.

To put them in their place on this issue, offer to have the federal election commission supply photo voter id cards to those who say they can’t afford one.

[VOA]

“Interestingly, my FEDERALLY ISSUED pilot’s license couldn’t be
used as a valid ID. “

That’s pretty amazing.
I don’t know how it is in TN, but my younger (and usually) smarter
brother didn’t renew his driver’s license in time.
MO is already pretty strict on issuing licenses; he spent the next
couple of weeks getting his birth certificate from Oklahoma,
an affadavit from his wife supporting his identity was involved somewhere
in this mess...
and I and my Mom ended up driving him around for about a week before
we could drive him out to get his new license.

At least in MO, illegals aren’t getting much love with Rep. Governor Blunt
and Jay “Me Too” Nixon putting out more proposed laws to encourage
illegals to avoid MO or self-deport to sanctuary cities like
LA or New Haven, CT.

[angkor]

And yet we are to believe that a fee of generally under $100 for a state id/license is a poll tax?

$100? More like $free.

IIRC Georgia offered free ID + TRANSPORT to obtain it.

[Nevermore]

And yet we are to believe that a fee of generally under $100 for a state id/license is a poll tax?

Hell, I'd gladly agree to full government funding of IDs if it legitimizes the voting process and the ID is an enforced voting requirement. What we have now is simply a sham!
In fact, how about a biometric ID? Can you imagine what Kos Kids would do in their pants if there were a credible deterrent to voter fraud? It would be the best-spent $10B in years.