Thread: Supreme Court allows Arizona to require photo ID in November

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nati ... terid.html

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled Friday that Arizona may require voters to provide photo IDs when they cast their ballots next month.
The justices cautioned that they were not issuing a ruling on the constitutionality of Arizona's law. “As we have noted, the facts in these cases are hotly contested,” the court said in an unsigned five-page order.

The ruling merely allows the Nov. 7 election to proceed with the photo ID law in place. Federal courts still will have to resolve a lawsuit contending that the law will disenfranchise numerous voters, particularly the elderly and minorities.
Courts in Georgia and Missouri have blocked similar laws.

Justice John Paul Stevens, in a brief concurring opinion, said the high court's action makes it more likely that the constitutional issues “will be resolved correctly on the basis of historical facts rather than speculation.”

The law requires voters to prove citizenship when registering to vote and to show photo IDs when they go to the polls. The law was meant to make sure illegal immigrants weren't casting ballots.

Opponents of the law contend it discourages some people from voting, including the elderly, poor and disadvantaged who don't always carry IDs. Arizona residents, Indian tribes and community groups filed suit in May.

A federal judge ruled the state could enforce the law. But the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals later blocked it from taking effect for the Nov. 7 election.

In his bid to allow the state to go forward, Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard told the justices that “voter registration at the polls is an emerging issue of national importance. States have a compelling interest in curbing fraud and protecting the integrity of elections.”

Voters without proper ID may cast provisional ballots and furnish identification within five business days of the election.

Lacking photo identification, voters still can cast ballots during the state's early voting period. State officials said there is ample time to compare signatures on the ballot with those on registration rolls.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A little bit of common sense creeped into this insane situation!

Dixie

You can say that again Dixie!!

This is great news. I'll send a copy to the Dem. candadate for Ohio's Sec. of State. She opposes our ID law which is similar.

OK!

A little bit of common sense creeped into this insane situation!

Dixie

This is just great..common sense..isn't it a beautiful thing! Since reading the thoughts of these judges, I've come to the conclusion that not all is lost. Of course, I won't let my guard down.

Justice John Paul Stevens, in a brief concurring opinion, said the high court's action makes it more likely that the constitutional issues “will be resolved correctly on the basis of historical facts rather than speculation.”

I hope this means that all of their whinning won't be considered.

Chalk up another loss for the enemy. I love it when the pro-illegal immigrant advocates and open border crowds take a much deserved punch in the kisser. Honestly, I hate to take pleasure from someone elses pain, but better them then me!

This is just great..common sense..isn't it a beautiful thing!

I'm with you guys!