The Supreme Court on Monday upheld Indiana's law requiring voters to present government-issued picture identification at the polls, validating Republican efforts to impose a law they say will cut down on voter fraud.
Its the highest-profile Republican v. Democrat case to reach the high court since the 2000 Bush v. Gore lawsuit that effectively decided that year's presidential race. This case doesn't have as much at stake but has still managed to inflame the passions of political partisans even during this primary season.
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the 6-3 opinion, and was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy. Justice Antonin Scalia filed a concurring opinion joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Justice David Souter wrote the dissent joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Justice Stephen Breyer filed his own dissent.
"There is no question about the legitimacy or importance of the state's interest in counting only the votes of eligible voters," Stevens wrote, noting that the law doesn't impose "excessively burdensome requirements."
Show your ID before you can vote. Sounds like a good idea doesn't it? I mean, with liberals screaming about voter fraud during the 2004 election, you'd think they would get behind an idea like that. Well, I guess not.
For more on why "voter fraud" is a myth, see this amicus brief filed with the Court by the Brennan Center for Justice, the People for the American Way Foundation and others. ("The record contains no evidence of polling place impersonation fraud in Indiana: the State conceded that it was unaware of any incidents of attempted or successful impersonation fraud in Indiana; that no one in Indiana history has been indicted for impersonation fraud; and that no evidence of impersonation fraud was presented to the Indiana legislature during the debate over the photo ID law.")
So, now wait a minute. During the 2004 election, liberals were coming out of the woodwork to proclaim that there was "voting irregularities" and outright fraud going on. Once they won in 2006, they decided to keep quiet about "irregularities" because that might call into question that they legitimately won the election.
Plus, if you're required to show your ID when you vote, how are all those dead people going to vote Democrat anyway?
Travis
No comments:
Post a Comment