Skip to comments.
Court Throws Out Indiana Voter ID Law
theindychannel.com ^
| September 17, 2009
Posted on 09/17/2009 7:47:19 AM PDT by Abathar
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 221-239 next last
WTH?!?!?
1
posted on
09/17/2009 7:47:20 AM PDT
by
Abathar
To: Abathar
This was the model used by other states to draft theirs after the Supreme Court upheld it and it was used in the 2008 election, WTH is going on here?
2
posted on
09/17/2009 7:48:31 AM PDT
by
Abathar
(Proudly posting without reading the article carefully since 2004)
To: Abathar
Another globalist tyrant in a black robe. Does Indiana have a recall provision for jurists?
3
posted on
09/17/2009 7:49:08 AM PDT
by
skeeter
(Pterocarya fraxinifolia)
To: Abathar
I hate to have the Feds involved in things, but for national elections we need a federal law that requires voter ID. If the state doesn’t like it, fine, they don’t have to do it, and their votes will not be included in the tally. For their state elections, I guess they can do whatever stupid thing their citizens will allow.
4
posted on
09/17/2009 7:49:41 AM PDT
by
brytlea
(Jesus loves me, this I know.)
To: Abathar
The courts of the US are openly fermenting insurrection.
5
posted on
09/17/2009 7:49:53 AM PDT
by
Psycho_Bunny
(ALSO SPRACH ZEROTHUSTRA)
To: Abathar
How is 6-3 a “splintered ruling”?
6
posted on
09/17/2009 7:50:21 AM PDT
by
airborne
(Don't let history record that, when faced with evil, you did nothing!)
To: skeeter
Better believe we will find out, it was the state court of appeals that just did this, and it was already ruled on by the S.C..
7
posted on
09/17/2009 7:50:33 AM PDT
by
Abathar
(Proudly posting without reading the article carefully since 2004)
To: Abathar
seems this would be quickly overturned by a challenge upstream federally since direct precedence is only one year old
8
posted on
09/17/2009 7:50:47 AM PDT
by
wardaddy
(I could care less if you think I am a racist...really...just try to defend your position.)
To: Abathar
I think this problem is worthy of a constitutional amendment.
To: Abathar
This is outrageous (as usual). Judges should have no right to 'overturn' laws. That is the function of the legislature, and ultimately the people. If the people, not a handful of elitists, decide a law is unconstitutional, then it is their responsibility to elect new representatives to change the law.
Coming as it does on top of the ACORN scandals this is especially obnoxious. It is legitimate to have laws designed to prevent vote fraud, and there was nothing onerous about this law. This just opens the door wide, again, to vote fraud.
10
posted on
09/17/2009 7:50:53 AM PDT
by
Liberty1970
(Democrats are not in control. God is. And Thank God for that!)
To: Abathar
11
posted on
09/17/2009 7:51:04 AM PDT
by
B.O. Plenty
(Give war a chance...)
To: Abathar
Indiana League of Women Voters (Democrat) got it killed...
This PASSED the US Supreme Court Test, but the State Appeals Court is throwing it out because it treats Absentees differently than live voters.
(HINT: Absentee voter fraud is where it’s at, now)
12
posted on
09/17/2009 7:51:20 AM PDT
by
tcrlaf
("Hope" is the most Evil of all Evils"-Neitzsche)
To: airborne
13
posted on
09/17/2009 7:52:06 AM PDT
by
Scythian
To: airborne
The same way a “5-4” Rowe v. Wade was “decisive”.
14
posted on
09/17/2009 7:53:22 AM PDT
by
SJSAMPLE
To: Abathar
Indiana courts can’t overturn a Fed supreme court ruling, can they? it’s a higher court.
To: Abathar
So how do the poor, elderly and minorities board aircraft in Indiana??
16
posted on
09/17/2009 7:53:45 AM PDT
by
DTogo
(High time to bring back the Sons of Liberty !!)
To: B.O. Plenty
Indeed, I don’t see any other way to avoid an outright slaughter and civil war.
We cannot live with these people. They are insisting on enslaving us, using government to do so.
And we will not be enslaved.
A peaceful separation at the state level would be preferred, but the collectivists wouldn’t allow that, because they are intent on forcing everyone to conform to their will.
17
posted on
09/17/2009 7:54:04 AM PDT
by
MrB
(Go Galt now, save Bowman for later)
To: Abathar; Cloverfarm; TMA62; Military family member; Republic; Teacher317; IN Farm Girl; defconw; ...
IF YOU WOULD LIKE ON OR OFF THIS INDIANA PING LIST PLEASE SEND ME A FREEPMAIL.
18
posted on
09/17/2009 7:54:30 AM PDT
by
Earthdweller
(Harvard won the election again...so what's the problem.......?)
To: Abathar
Those against the law contend that it keeps poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots.
How?
19
posted on
09/17/2009 7:55:50 AM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(Seniors, the new shovel ready project under socialized medicine.)
To: DTogo
Leftists even reject the idea when you dispel this excuse with an offer to provide state issued photo ID at no cost to the needy.
They come up with an even lamer excuse of the poor/elderly being unable to go get the ID.
Well, bleeding heart lib - GO TAKE THEM TO GET IT.
20
posted on
09/17/2009 7:55:58 AM PDT
by
MrB
(Go Galt now, save Bowman for later)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 221-239 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson