Skip to comments.Appeals court declines to take up voter ID case (WI)
Posted on 04/25/2012 2:19:23 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
Madison -- The Court of Appeals declined to take up a Dane County case Wednesday that blocked the state's new law requiring people to show photo ID at the polls.
The latest order is a further setback for those who support the voter ID law, and is another sign the law almost surely will remain halted for the May 8 primaries and June 5 recall elections.
Dane County Circuit Judge David Flanagan temporarily enjoined the voter ID law last month, saying the Milwaukee branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and immigrant rights group Voces de la Frontera were likely to succeed in their argument the law is unconstitutional.
A week later, Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess permanently enjoined the law in a case brought by the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin.
The state Department of Justice appealed both decisions, to two separate courts of appeals. Both appeals courts said the cases should go directly to the state Supreme Court because of their statewide importance, and the appeals courts did not render opinions on them.
But the Supreme Court this month said it would not take either case, sending them back to the appeals courts.
By then, the trial in the NAACP case was under way. The Waukesha-based District 2 Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that it would not take up the case because of its procedural posture.
Flanagan is expected to rule on the case sometime after mid-June. Either side can appeal the case, and at that stage the court of appeals will have to take the case because there will be a final ruling.
(Excerpt) Read more at jsonline.com ...
Wisconcin Breaking News: No voter ID for recall ping
FReep Mail me if you want on, or off, this Wisconsin interest ping list.
Wisconcin = Wisconsin
What A Crock! WI sure has a bunch of liberal boneheads.
Seriously? The Supreme Court bumped it back to the appeals court now they’re refusing to take it. What next? Someone has to hear it.
FAST TRACK TO SCOTUS. There is a compelling need that justice be served prior to the recall.
Maybe this is a good thing then. I would like to see the voter ID law reinstated before June 5.
This is utter Fascism...unmasked, open, brazen. What recourse is there? Doesn’t the SCOTUS have any role here? The Indiana precedent clearly makes all such laws kosher.
It’s Madison - what did you expect?
Hard to get voters to understand that the communists are in control and will use our very owns laws against our Constitutional rights.
I have a question. If I go in to vote and someone else has already taken my ballot, what then? Obviously, my ID has no bearing since whoever stole my vote didn’t need one. Maybe, I should just vote here, go to West Bend, vote there, go to Hartford, Johnson Creek etc.
If I want to go on an airplane, I have to have a valid ID; if I want to drive a car, same, if I want to write a check, same thing. I am so flippin’ confused! Do people have to have an ID to get state aid? Register for college? Is it because some of those are not rights? OK, then, how about getting married? Since so many consider it a right to be married ie; gays.
I guess I just cannot see the logic in not requiring an ID.
As for the rest of your question: of course you need an id for most of those things, but you already knew that!
Good thing conservatives are honest, moral people.
Otherwise many from out of state could go in and request ballots...voter registration rolls are public domain.
Only the left does this kind of reprehensible act. They never have to worry about us doing these kinds of things.
Your mistake is looking for logic. This facilitates Democratic voter fraud, plain and simple. If you failed to believe it, this should help you come to grips with the reality of the situation. I suspect you know it deep down, it's just hard to imagine public officials being so blatantly transparent in their attempts to defraud the sanctity of our electoral process
Well, that certainly pushes it out well past the date they need the illegal votes to oust the Governor. Good work!
“I have a question. If I go in to vote and someone else has already taken my ballot, what then? Obviously, my ID has no bearing since whoever stole my vote didnt need one. Maybe, I should just vote here, go to West Bend, vote there, go to Hartford, Johnson Creek etc.”
They know who the dead or moved registered voters are. So they don’t give ballots unless you are certain not to show up. Also, they wait ‘til the end of the day.
partially true, because you CAN make your vote count even if it is to offset the stolen one. Demand a provisional ballot, file a protest, find the media pronto, and make a great big fuss.
This is very disappointing that the Wisc Supreme Court did not have the balls to review this case, especially with a 4-3 supposed conservative majority on the court. Sending it back to the same Appeals courts that rejected it in the first place is both cowardly & ridiculous. What a bunch of chickensh_ts the Wisc Supreme Court turned out to be be. There is no way that SCOTUS will review this prior to the May recall primaries or June recall election. There will likely be 100,000 or more, out-of-state union “voters” pouring in from IL, IA & MN to vote in the WI recall election. Personally I believe that the WI Repubs & Gov Scott Walker should just declare the judges rulings to be null & void and to proceed with the photo ID requirement. It’s what a dimturd would do!
I do not believe that the lawsuit challenges the requirement to sign the voter roll before given a ballot.
So there may be some evidence to pursue including fingerprints on ballot if the DA is so inclined.
Yep! The fix is in. I fear that with everything else going on that if the dems steal this that the SWHTF. Otherwise BOHICA. (Bend over, here it comes again.)
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.