Posted on 01/09/2008 8:22:32 PM PST by My_Name_is_a_Number
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A conservative majority of the Supreme Court appeared ready Wednesday to support an Indiana law requiring voters to show photo identification, despite concerns that it could deprive thousands of people of their right to vote. The Supreme Court is reviewing an Indiana law that requires voters to show a photo ID. At issue is whether state laws designed to stem voter fraud would disenfranchise large numbers of Americans who might lack proper identification -- many of them elderly, poor or minority voters. In what has become a highly partisan legal and political fight, the justices wrestled with a balancing test of sorts to ensure both state and individual interests were addressed. Civil rights activists and the state Democratic Party complain Indiana's law is the most restrictive in the nation. "The real question is, does it disenfranchise anyone?"
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
I wish CA voters were required to show I.D.
Any Tom, Dick or Jose can go to the polls and vote.
That is why the ‘Rats want Driver’s Licenses for illegals.
So they can then go to to next window at the D.M.V. and register to vote after they apply for a driver’s license.
Semper Fi,
Kelly
No kidding! Welfare recipients here in Michigan have to present some kind of official ID in order to get benefits, and that costs money. The argument that those on welfare are disenfranchised is pure bull puckey.
Compare the time it takes the average Joe to do his taxes with the time it would take for him to get an ID card.
They claim the poor and elderly and minorities will be disenfranchsied. Now has is that?
If these same people have the wherewithall and motivation to actually vote, then those same people have the wherewithall and motivation to go through the process of getting their voter ID.
No, apparently in Indiana, the real question will simply be, Do they have a valid ID? If they do, they can vote, if they do not, they can not.
.....The Court should be deciding if there is anything in the Constitution prohibiting legislatures from determining what they must do to prevent fraud.....
While that is a rational thought, Justice Alito was referring to the fact that in the case before the court there were no voters that were actually prevented from voting for lack of ID. There was no voter with standing as part of the complaint.
That is my understanding from news reports.
I am not a lawyer and haven’t played one on TV
What a load. For that matter, the original plan from the Founders was that if you DIDN'T have land, you didn't get to vote. What were those guys thinking?
[/SARCASM]
Thank you, Lion. Unfortunately, that was back when I had regular 4 day weekends and lots of time and energy to invest. These days I barely have time to sleep. Not particularly happy about it, but you do what you've got to do. Besides that, I have a lot of stress in my job. I just don't have the stomach or the stress tolerance anymore for the despicable behavior of politicians in general, and of liberals in particular. When I am not working, I need to get rid of stress....not add to it.
That said, there is a real need for someone to follow up with the voter fraud thread. It really was a collaberative effort anyway. I couldn't have done it without the input and support of you, Nic, Budge and others who assisted with the research. I believe there is a link to the original voter fraud thread on my profile page or, if not, there is definitely a link on the thread that comes up if you click on the Iris picture on my profile page. Don't have time to look it up right now or I would.
I hope you are doing well. Don't see much of you these days. What's new with you?
I saw on Fox & FRiends this morning that Dems are encouraging their voters to come out and vote for Huckabee in the Michigan primary. They had their votes taken away from them because of the early primary and Michigan allows voters to cross over and vote in either primary.
WHo are these people that don’t have a government issued photo ID? Anyone with money drives a car....driver’s license. Anyone without money gets government assistance....welfare ID.
Oh....I get it.....thousands of people who shouldn’t be voting won’t be able to vote.
Hillary is brown marking her panties.
Can you spell “counterfeit ID’s”?
I’d be happy if they’d just require I.D. in CA to vote!!!
Voter fraud goes back at least to 1996 when Bob Dornan lost to Loretta Sanchez and Newt Gingrich & the GOP MAJORITY at that time refused to investigate!!!
Yep. It disenfranchises Mexican citizens.
I was just getting ready to say that fingerprints should also be required when I saw your post. bttt
How does she cash her social security check? If it’s direct deposit, how’d she open the account? This disenfranchised stuff is crap.
IMO, anyone living off the taxpayers shouldn’t have a right to vote anyway.
Exactly. The WANT those who are ineligible to vote because they KNOW that the vast majority of them will vote ‘Rat.
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.