Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supremes Take Voter ID Case
WSJ ^ | 10/16/12 | Jason Riley

Posted on 10/16/2012 12:26:44 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks

Arizona passed a law in 2005 that says anyone registering to vote must provide "satisfactory evidence of United States citizenship," in the form of a driver's license, passport, birth certificate or some other document. The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to decide whether the law stands.

Critics of the statute, such as the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, say that the proof-of-citizenship requirement is an unconstitutional burden and that it conflicts with the federal National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which allows prospective voters to register by checking a box on a form that asks "Are you a citizen of the United States?"

State law enforcement officials defend the measure. "Arizona has a right to ask people for evidence that they are citizens when they register to vote," said Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne in a statement yesterday. "If someone is willing to vote illegally, he or she is willing to sign a false statement regarding citizenship. This 'honor system' is not sufficient to guard the integrity of the election system."

According to John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky, the authors of "Who's Counting?," a new book on voter fraud, the Arizona law has prevented at least 20,000 non-citizens from registering to vote.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: aliens; voterid

1 posted on 10/16/2012 12:26:46 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Hmmmm, guess these liberalidiots will allow me to check “Qualified Airline Pilot,” or “Board Certified Physician” and then do my thing with them.

Folks, we let this pass, and we may as just well start the civil war now, because that’s what it’ll result in.


2 posted on 10/16/2012 12:29:06 PM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
"This 'honor system' is not sufficient to guard the integrity of the election system."

Especially in today's America. People now vote for freebies, not for the good of the country.

3 posted on 10/16/2012 12:29:55 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (This is America! Being dead is no excuse not to vote!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

The newly “evolved” Chief Justice Roberts will save Arizona’s law. /sarc


4 posted on 10/16/2012 12:31:13 PM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

I don’t have a good feeling about this. SCROTUS has been a mess lately, what with Roberts having been coopted and compromised.


5 posted on 10/16/2012 12:34:37 PM PDT by Lazamataz (WAAAAAAAAAHHHhhhhh.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

” The newly “evolved” Chief Justice Roberts will save Arizona’s law. /sarc”

I wonder what they had on Roberts ?


6 posted on 10/16/2012 12:35:48 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

0bama will hold those gay bath house photos ‘over Roberts’ head’ for as long as they both shall live.


7 posted on 10/16/2012 12:36:33 PM PDT by Obama_Is_Sabotaging_America
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote
Or just check a box saying there is no legal prohibition for them to purchase a firearm?

This seems so elementary to anyone with half a brain:

"If someone is willing to vote illegally, he or she is willing to sign a false statement regarding citizenship. This 'honor system' is not sufficient to guard the integrity of the election system."

8 posted on 10/16/2012 12:40:58 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
If the SCOTUS decides no ID is required to vote, the NRA and GOA should immediately sue under "equal protection" that no ID be required to purchase or carry a firearm.
9 posted on 10/16/2012 1:02:23 PM PDT by DTogo (High time to bring back the Sons of Liberty !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

10 posted on 10/16/2012 1:04:10 PM PDT by dead (It ain't over until the phone lady sings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
Critics of the statute, such as the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, say that the proof-of-citizenship requirement is an unconstitutional burden and that it conflicts with the federal National Voter Registration Act of 1993


11 posted on 10/16/2012 1:09:22 PM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
Bttt.

5.56mm

12 posted on 10/16/2012 1:11:26 PM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dead

LOL - post of the day!


13 posted on 10/16/2012 1:12:01 PM PDT by newfreep (Breitbart sent me...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

“the Arizona law has prevented at least 20,000 non-citizens from registering to vote”

The Mexican legal defense fund is deeply saddened.


14 posted on 10/16/2012 1:13:25 PM PDT by ScottfromNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: M Kehoe
Volunteer at non-profit organizations.

Just for grins, you liberals/socialists/marxists reading this...

Enlisting in the United States Army, HOORAH!

5.56mm

15 posted on 10/16/2012 1:14:57 PM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker
” The newly “evolved” Chief Justice Roberts will save Arizona’s law. /sarc”

I wonder what they had on Roberts ?


If they do have anything on Roberts, we need to find out what it is and expose it. Better to be rid of him than have someone who can be blackmailed on the bench.
16 posted on 10/16/2012 1:39:18 PM PDT by Sparticus (Tar and feathers for the next dumb@ss Republican that uses the word bipartisanship.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Sparticus

The problem is how to find out what it is.


17 posted on 10/16/2012 1:41:19 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

“a dead girl or a live boy”


18 posted on 10/16/2012 1:42:30 PM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

Nice list. But the misspelling of profit spoils it.


19 posted on 10/16/2012 1:44:40 PM PDT by upchuck (Porn, cheaper than dating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Judging by their ObamaCare decision, foreigners around the world over 12 will all be eligible voters.


20 posted on 10/16/2012 1:45:42 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

Add to the list buying alcohol and renting a video.


21 posted on 10/16/2012 1:46:02 PM PDT by Lizavetta (You get what you tolerate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Must be one or the other, or something equally humiliating.


22 posted on 10/16/2012 1:49:09 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dead

of a sissy?

shouls be “is a sissy”


23 posted on 10/16/2012 1:52:03 PM PDT by NeoCaveman ("If I had a son he'd look like B.O.'s lunch" - Rin Tin Tin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

Interesting questions from 7 years ago.....

http://underneaththeirrobes.blogs.com/main/2005/08/the_roberts_ado.html


24 posted on 10/16/2012 1:54:29 PM PDT by treetopsandroofs (Had FDR been GOP, there would have been no World Wars, just "The Great War" and "Roosevelt's Wars".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Sparticus

http://underneaththeirrobes.blogs.com/main/2005/08/the_roberts_ado.html


25 posted on 10/16/2012 1:57:14 PM PDT by treetopsandroofs (Had FDR been GOP, there would have been no World Wars, just "The Great War" and "Roosevelt's Wars".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Does anyone know if they have taken a homo. marriage case, and if so, which one(s)?


26 posted on 10/16/2012 2:30:09 PM PDT by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NeoCaveman

Play on “of Assisi”


27 posted on 10/16/2012 2:35:54 PM PDT by expat2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

It was either one hell of a bribe or pictures/video of him doing something in a hotel room.


28 posted on 10/16/2012 3:10:59 PM PDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity (Liberalism is a social disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

I am not at all comfortable with anything important coming before this court now that it has three distinct factions: 4 liberals, 4 conservatives, and 1 moron.


29 posted on 10/16/2012 3:17:55 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker
I wonder what they had on Roberts ?

Between a dead girl and a live boy? My guess is the latter.

30 posted on 10/16/2012 3:20:06 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
That's the rumor!
31 posted on 10/16/2012 3:27:45 PM PDT by Reily (l)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard; Excuse_My_Bellicosity; All

I WILL say this. Up until Roberts took his OWN shoddy interpretation of this case (an intellectually contemptible one), he had been a steadfast conservative guy. I was MORTIFIED not just for his ruling, but the ludicrous methodology he employed to arrive at his opinion.

Something smells to high heaven!


32 posted on 10/16/2012 3:47:03 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

Comment #33 Removed by Moderator

To: Clint N. Suhks

NOT requiring proof of citizenship to vote is similar to conducting a driver’s test for a driver’s license in a car that does not go out of first gear. Yes the candidate is driving, but no, they cannot fully apply the law to determine if the candidate can really drive.


34 posted on 10/16/2012 4:22:15 PM PDT by kevinm13 (Tim Geithner is a tax cheat. Manmade "Global Warming" is a HOAX!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Forget Roberts, this one has Kennedy’s patronizing open-borders attitude all over it. Disaster in the making.


35 posted on 10/16/2012 5:44:33 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

It turns out that the Obamacare ruling actually makes it easier to repeal it since, as a tax, it comes under the rules about reconciliation. Thus, it cannot be filabustered.

Roberts did not get the law off the hook.


36 posted on 10/16/2012 10:54:35 PM PDT by arrogantsob (The Disaster MUST Go. Sarah herself supports Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob

It turns out that the Obamacare ruling actually makes it easier to repeal it since, as a tax, it comes under the rules about reconciliation. Thus, it cannot be filabustered.

Roberts did not get the law off the hook.

Compared to striking the law down, he sure did. Only now we have his decision that the Feds can force any unconstitutional garbage they want as long as they use a tax to enforce it.


37 posted on 10/17/2012 4:11:16 AM PDT by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: fwdude
The newly “evolved” Chief Justice Roberts will save Arizona’s law. /sarc

Of course he will. After all, when he upheld Obamacare, he mentioned something along the lines of allowing the law to stand because it was passed by the people's elected representatives. /sarc

(If that argument ever has any merit at all, why would the SCOTUS ever strike down any law? Oh, but of course; STATE laws are always subject to Federal scrutiny! So, never mind. Arizona is screwed.)

38 posted on 10/17/2012 7:50:46 AM PDT by newgeezer (It is [the people's] right and duty to be at all times armed. --Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob

Thanks for the info.


39 posted on 10/17/2012 8:30:56 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

It does not matter what The Disaster calls the tax, it is still a tax, so Roberts was not wrong about that. I have not read the decision and was quite disappointed by it but from what I have discerned the decision is centered on the fact that a tax was passed.


40 posted on 10/17/2012 9:27:19 AM PDT by arrogantsob (The Disaster MUST Go. Sarah herself supports Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

In fact, radical leftists (most Democrats) vote against the good of the country.

“Especially in today’s America. People now vote for freebies, not for the good of the country.”


41 posted on 10/19/2012 11:33:24 AM PDT by XenaLee (The only good commie is a dead commie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob

But I thought that there were constitutional requirements for taxes. For one thing, I thought a tax imposed by the federal government was supposed to be levied equally on all, not on just a few or on a certain group of people (ie those that refuse to purchase health insurance, in this instance). Sure there are all kinds of exemptions and waivers and deductions that allow taxpayers to pay less. But the initial tax itself is levied evenly.

For the government to be able to single out one segment of Americans to selectively tax is, by its’ very nature, unconstitutional.

So, for it to really BE a tax, wouldn’t those same standards and requirements have to apply? And if so, wouldn’t that make Roberts wrong re: his ruling?


42 posted on 10/19/2012 11:40:30 AM PDT by XenaLee (The only good commie is a dead commie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: XenaLee

I don’t pretend to be a legal expert in this but here is what the constitution says about Congress’ power to tax: “The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform thoughout the United States.” Article I, Section 8, paragraph 1.

It does not say that TAXES must be so, just Duties, Imposts and Excises.

“No Capitation, or other direct Tax, shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken..” Article I, Section 9, paragraph 4.

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State. Article I, Section 9, paragraph 5.

We are in vague areas here since there is no definition of what a “tax” actually is.


43 posted on 10/20/2012 10:04:57 PM PDT by arrogantsob (The Disaster MUST Go. Sarah herself supports Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson