Skip to comments.[WI] Judge rules voter ID law unconstitutional [makes temp injunction permanent]
Posted on 03/12/2012 12:39:19 PM PDT by Hunton Peck
Madison - A Dane County judge permanently enjoined the state's new voter ID law on Monday - the second judge in a week to block the requirement that voters show photo identification at the polls.
"A government that undermines the very foundation of its existence - the people's inherent, pre-constitutional right to vote - imperils its legitimacy as a government by the people, for the people, and especially of the people," said the eight-page opinion by Dane County Judge Richard Niess. "It sows the seeds for its own demise as a democratic institution. This is precisely what 2011 Wisconsin Act 23 does with its photo ID mandates."
Niess' ruling goes further than the one issued by another judge last week because it permanently halts the law. Tuesday's order by Dane County Judge David Flanagan blocked the law for the April 3 presidential primary and local elections, but not beyond that.
The latest order may make it harder for the state to put the voter ID law into effect before the April 3 election because it would have to win two appeals in less than four weeks. Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen has asked for a stay of the earlier order, and he is expected to appeal it this week.
Kevin Kennedy, director of the state Government Accountability Board, said his election agency is telling local clerks to keep training to implement the law so they're prepared to do so if it's suddenly restored.
"We'll just live with what is there," Kennedy said.
Whether Wisconsin's photo ID law will stand is widely considered to be decided by a higher court - a point the judge in the case made from the bench during a hearing Friday. There are four lawsuits pending against it - two in Dane County court and two...
(Excerpt) Read more at jsonline.com ...
Can we just dip our finger into a jar of sterile, non-allergenic purple dye after we vote whose right would that violate?
You are exactly right, it does not violate anyone’s right.
It is simple and it makes sense. What if you went a step further and had each voter dip their finger in indelible purple ink and then put their fingerprint on their ballot. Would that infringe on any rights? Just thinking of some way to eliminate the rampant fraud.
Thanks Hunton Peck.
Some people have absolutely no shame.
Just another liberal activist judge in Madison. The city is full of them. Like rats. Hard to get rid of them.
How do they guarantee our laws are being enforced if no-one is allowed to question who is voting? They don’t have a right to tie a specific ballot to an individual person, but there is absolutely no civil rights abuse in verifying a person is who they say they are! The state has bent over backwards to help people who want to vote to get their FREE IDs (which they are req’d by law to have anyway).
How do they get a job, or transact business without SOME form of ID - heck, where I used to work the illegal immigrants sending money through our Western Union service every week even had ID (”Mexican Consulate Cards” if not a DL in some states), and they are trying to say it’s a burden for an American Citizen to get a genuine ID?
BS, an ID is so easy to get with even a minimal amount of paperwork that it’s almost pathetic. (Granted they run your name through a computer system that WILL bring up your legal records when you get one, so some people might not be able to get one for fear of being arrested... that’s probably a problem for a great majority of Democrats *snicker*).
The State will provide a FREE ID if you go to the DMV and ask for one. Why haven't any of the groups bringing up the lawsuits organized any effort to help the alleged 220,000 that can't get an ID, GET AN ID ??? Wouldn't that be more helpful?
Another judge that should be demoted to working at subway.
You think they would want to be “helpful” in any way that would hurt their illegal alien and dead friends?
That surely doesn't mean any impostor that can schlep in to a voting booth, does it?
All the Voter I.D. is to make certain that the voter is a U.S. Citizen and has the right to vote.
The Constitution did say “Citizens”. And we are trying to make certain. !
So what’s wrong with that?
Yes - you aren’t an irrational leftist mental case.
WTH is going on in this country?
That's not coincidental at all.
There is no ID requirement in New Hampshire.
I am determined to vote 3 times in this presidential and gubernatorial election, principles and Constitution be damned. I can go from one polling station to the next and say I’m a different coworker each time. I know where my coworkers live.
Send this post to every leftist you like.
Think of the demographic of people who:
1. Don’t have an ID to show.
2. Have one, but are so fearful of showing it that they won’t vote if they have to show one.
You cannot apply for welfare without an id. The basis for concern is absurd. This is politicking from the bench.
Now there’s a judge begging for an opportunity to explain to his employer’s, We the People, just how and where he gets off participating in disenfranchising them of their vote!!
BTW...here’s how the adults north and south of us handle this issue..
Heres How Canada Verifies...
.heres how they deal with voter fraud issues south of the border....and ..its all you need to know about the treasonous, malignant American Left....
...the Mexican Voter I.D. card has NINE security characteristics, including a fingerprint, a photograph, watermarks and holograms. What is more, in Mexico, the lists of electors that are distributed to political parties include the photo and the full name and address of the electors.
and if WE dont start doing so..there is very little incentive to continue to voluntarily support the Feds every April 15th.
The Communists aren’t going down without a fight.
This ruling will add significance to the bill moving through the Minnesota legislature right now. It will amend the state constitution to require voter ID, and is favored by over 80% of the polled voters.
Can Holder believe he’s going to overrule a state’s constitution? The line must be drawn soon.