~Updated below
Common sense prevails. It's an AP article, so take with salt.
The court's decision was 6-3, and the writer tagged it as 'splintered'. A regular constitutional crisis.
The aclu originally brought the case on behalf of Indiana voters. (Actually, there are only two plaintiffs)
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.
Uh, huh. It's funny how that same constituency isn't discouraged from producing these necessary documents for a government handout.
Moving on...
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.... 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...
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.
Responsible citizens hope so. The Court went on to say,
"We cannot conclude that the statute imposes 'excessively burdensome requirements' on any class of voters," Stevens said.
AMEN!
Everyone & their dog weighs in here.
Updated: A gold star for Surber! Not only did the writer of this AP article sneak in a totally unrelated reference to the 2000 SCOTUS ruling concerning bush/gore - it was in error (*cough *cough) - claiming that 2000 ruling to be 5-4 when in fact it was 7-2.
And Surber gets a second gold star with his reminder that one of the plaintiffs in this current Indiana voter I.D. ruling was a Florida snowbird who couldn't produce proper Indiana I.D. when back in Indiana.
In short, the law works.
