Thread: Voter ID Law Headed to Supreme Court Next Week

High Court Poised For Voter ID Case

By MARK SHERMAN, The Associated Press
Published: December 31, 2007

"WASHINGTON - The dispute over Indiana's voter identification law that is headed to the Supreme Court next week is as much a partisan political drama as a legal tussle.

The mainly Republican backers of the law, including the Bush administration, say state-produced photo identification is a prudent measure to cut down on vote fraud - even though Indiana has never had a prosecution of the kind of fraud the law is supposed to prevent.

The opponents, mainly Democrats, view voter ID a modern-day poll tax that disproportionately affects poor, minority and elderly voters - who tend to back Democrats. Yet, a federal judge found that opponents of the law were unable to produce evidence of a single Indiana resident who had been barred from voting because of the law.

The Supreme Court, which famously split 5-4 in the case that sealed the 2000 presidential election for George Bush, will take up the Indiana law on Jan. 9, just as the 2008 presidential primaries are getting under way.

A decision should come by late June, in time to be felt in the November elections in Indiana and in Georgia, the other state with a strict photo ID requirement, as well as in a handful of other states.

The justices will be asked to decide whether the law is an impermissible attempt to discourage certain voters or a reasonable precaution among several efforts aimed at cutting down on illegal voting.

"There's more than a little bit of irony in going to the Supreme Court and asking them to rise above partisan politics in election cases," said Richard Hasen, an election law expert at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.

The court's decision in the disputed 2000 election is partly responsible for the ensuing increase in election-related lawsuits and the loss of confidence by some groups in the voting system, Hasen said. Yet, the other branches of government seem more politicized than ever, leaving the court as the best option despite the 2000 election dispute, he said.

Indiana argues that demands for identification are frequent in today's society, and producing a photo ID at polling places is hardly onerous.

"In light of such widespread demands for ... government-issued photo identification, it is almost shocking that in late 2007 Indiana can be characterized as even unusual in requiring it at the polls," the state said in its court filing.

The Bush administration maintains states need not wait for fraud to occur to take action to prevent it. "The state's interest in deterring voter fraud before it happens is evident from the monumental harm that can come from such fraud," the government said in its supporting brief.

The law's opponents counter that an ID may be just one card among many in most people's wallets, but some groups are far less likely to have them.

Homeless people wanting to vote might face the most difficulty under the law. While the state will provide a voter ID card free of charge to the poor, applicants still must have a birth certificate or other documentation to get the ID card."

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/dec/31 ... r-id-case/

Voter ID is the law here in Arizona and it doesn't seem to be any problem.

Originally Posted by PinestrawGuys

Voter ID is the law here in Arizona and it doesn't seem to be any problem.

Yeah, I know about Arizona.

If the Supreme Court rules against voter ID, the illegal support groups will take AZ's law to court----or will the Supreme Court ruling automatically stop AZ from being able to require the ID???

I think the supreme court will set the precedent on this

This could open up the door for massive illegal voting if it goes
the wrong way and we couldn't do a thing about it

If they say you don't need ID to vote than it
basicly opens it up for anyone to vote

Even my 96 year old house bond Aunt had ID....give me a break.

It will also make it irrelevant for any type of ID as well wouldn't? I think it is important to ask for ID for voting and i don't think someone being poor doesn't have an ID and if that is the case do something about it. I have to give ID when i vote here in California.

This could easily be solved. Those who "supposedly" cannot afford ID, and can prove that they cannot afford it-----should be given a free ID through the county/state.

This is plain and simple-----an attempt to let the illegals sway our elections.

Every state should require proper documentation to ensure that only those eligible to vote are voting. Otherwise, it's a free for all, and voter fraud will be rampant. I fail to comprehend how requiring ID constitutes infringement of rights.

Originally Posted by fedupDeb

Every state should require proper documentation to ensure that only those eligible to vote are voting. Otherwise, it's a free for all, and voter fraud will be rampant. I fail to comprehend how requiring ID constitutes infringement of rights.

As usual, they are using lies and BS to try to fight the IDs. They are going back to the days when blacks and women were prevented from voting. They are saying that this is an attempt to prevent minorities from voting, and that is how they are trying to fight this!!!

Originally Posted by Bren4824

As usual, they are using lies and BS to try to fight the IDs. They are going back to the days when blacks and women were prevented from voting. They are saying that this is an attempt to prevent minorities from voting, and that is how they are trying to fight this!!!

Yeah, though in this day in age we can provide ID for free and there is no excuse and i think it is simply a diversion tactic and today you cant play that game it simply doesn't work.