W00tage for the Supreme Court!!!

[Chris_]

Supreme Court upholds photo ID law for voters in Indiana

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can require voters to produce photo identification without violating their constitutional rights, validating Republican-inspired voter ID laws.

In a splintered 6-3 ruling, the court upheld Indiana's strict photo ID requirement, which Democrats and civil rights groups said would deter poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots. Its backers said it was needed to prevent fraud.

It was the most important voting rights case since the Bush v. Gore dispute that sealed the 2000 election for George W. Bush. But the voter ID ruling lacked the conservative-liberal split that marked the 2000 case.

The law "is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting 'the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,'" Justice John Paul Stevens said in an opinion that was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy. Stevens was a dissenter in Bush v. Gore in 2000.

Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas also agreed with the outcome, but wrote separately.

Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter dissented, just as they did in 2000.

More than 20 states require some form of identification at the polls. Courts have upheld voter ID laws in Arizona, Georgia and Michigan, but struck down Missouri's. Monday's decision comes a week before Indiana's presidential primary.

The decision also could spur efforts to pass similar laws in other states.

Ken Falk, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, said he hadn't reviewed the decision, but he was "extremely disappointed" by it. Falk has said voter ID laws inhibit voting, and a person's right to vote "is the most important right." The ACLU brought the case on behalf of Indiana voters.

The case concerned a state law, passed in 2005, that was backed by Republicans as a way to deter voter fraud. Democrats and civil rights groups opposed the law as unconstitutional and called it a thinly veiled effort to discourage elderly, poor and minority voters — those most likely to lack proper ID and who tend to vote for Democrats.

This does not bode well for the dims in the next election.   

VOTER ID

[Lord Undies]

Demoncrats: "Voter fraud!  Stolen Elections!  Cheating!  This is CRIMINAL!"

Republicans: "Well, let's fix it."

Democrats: "NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!"

[Flame]

I have never gotten why having to show an ID is such a big deal...it's just common sense to me.

Glad the SC didn't wimp out!

[Chris_]

I have never gotten why having to show an ID is such a big deal...it's just common sense to me.

Glad the SC didn't wimp out!

Dead people have a hard time renewing their ID's.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Should have been 9-0, but I'm happy with the result anyway!

 

[Chris_]

Should have been 9-0, but I'm happy with the result anyway!

 

With the makeup of this Court, I'd be amazed if a 9 - 0 decision came down on bathroom breaks......

doc

[Lord Undies]

Should have been 9-0, but I'm happy with the result anyway!

 

With the makeup of this Court, I'd be amazed if a 9 - 0 decision came down on bathroom breaks......

doc

Yes, Ruthie would vote no.  I think she takes hers where she sits.

[Chris_]

Should have been 9-0, but I'm happy with the result anyway!

 

With the makeup of this Court, I'd be amazed if a 9 - 0 decision came down on bathroom breaks......

doc

Yes, Ruthie would vote no.  I think she takes hers where she sits.

...or she just remains full of it.

[Chris_]

^You guys owe me a keyboard....

doc

[Airwolf]

No wonder they wear robes.

[PatriotGame]

I have never gotten why having to show an ID is such a big deal...it's just common sense to me.

Glad the SC didn't wimp out!

Someone needs to explaine this to me:
If requiring proof of ID "inhibit voting and a person's right to vote", then how do these liars get driver's licenses, bank accounts, utilities connected, WELFARE, MEDICARE/MEDICADE and SSI support?

The statement that providing photo ID disenfranchises voters is only so much bull by-product. The real issue here is it keeps all of those dead people from voting Democrat. And, Democrats just can't have that!

[Chris_]

Looks like CNN is turning on their masters in the Democratic Party.  Check out the wording in this article... 

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Just as many Democrats have been getting nervous about their presidential prospects in November against Republican John McCain, the U.S. Supreme Court issues a major ruling that potentially could have significant political fallout.

For years, many Republicans have strongly supported these requirements as a way to make sure that only eligible U.S. citizens actually get to vote. Many Democrats have opposed these statutes, arguing that they often deter minority, elderly and poor voters from showing up at the polls. Some of these voters simply don’t have appropriate government-issued photo identification. More than 20 states already have such requirements. Now, with this Supreme Court decision, other states no doubt will follow suit.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/28/blitzer-court-ruling-could-have-huge-impact-at-the-polls/#more-6749

[Tess Anderson]

Yes, I was glad to hear of this SCOTUS decision - now I know for sure that McCaon will take that state in the fall again.