Wisconsin, Texas voter ID laws blocked by courts

[Meghan54]

The U.S. Supreme Court has blocked Wisconsin from enforcing its strict voter identification law in this year's election.


By a 6-3 vote, the justices granted an emergency appeal from civil rights lawyers who argued it was too late to put the rule into effect.

At nearly the same time, a federal judge in Texas struck down that state's new voter ID law on the grounds that it violated the constitutional right to vote and discriminated against racial minorities.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/wisconsin-texas-voter-id-laws-blocked-by-courts/ar-BB8qqbu

 

[Smoblikat]

I dont get it, why dont states just issue ID cards to everyone once they turn 18? It seems pretty logical to me, we all get issued social security cards at birth, why no state ID's (assuming you dont have one/a license.)

 

[DominionSeraph]

I dont get it, why dont states just issue ID cards to everyone once they turn 18? It seems pretty logical to me, we all get issued social security cards at birth, why no state ID's (assuming you dont have one/a license.)

Conservatards would have an aneurysm. MARK OF THE BEAST blah blah blah.

 

[michal1980]

aclu once again fighting for law breakers.

 

[xBiffx]

This "decision" was because of the timing of everything. With an election coming up in less than a month, its not that surprising.

In the long run, however, I don't think its going to be the same way. Time will tell.

 

[Paratus]

After we take care of voter ID for in person voting, I'd like to see a requirement to get your mail in ballots in person at the DMV while showing the same photo ID. I'd also like the limit on picking them up to be less than two weeks from the vote.

All this will cut down on mail in voter fraud.
Let's face it. If you can't be bothered to show up for voting, do we really want you to vote.

 

[xBiffx]

After we take care of voter ID for in person voting, I'd like to see a requirement to get your mail in ballots in person at the DMV while showing the same photo ID. I'd also like the limit on picking them up to be less than two weeks from the vote.

All this will cut down on mail in voter fraud.
Let's face it. If you can't be bothered to show up for voting, do we really want you to vote.

Part of the law that was just shot down was about that?

 

[Paratus]

Part of the law that was just shot down was about that?

After reading the article it looks like the absentee ballots are mailed to the voter. The ACLU was aguing thousands of ballots were already sent out without the ID requirement so it should be put on hold.

My arguement is if voter fraud is so important, then the state shouldn't be mailing absentee ballots out regardless of mailing in a copy of your ID. Voters should have to show up on a day two weeks before election and prove who they are before recieving an absentee ballot. One day should be enough.

If you can't be bothered to show up and prove who you are, why should you be allowed to vote.

 

[xBiffx]

After reading the article it looks like the absentee ballots are mailed to the voter. The ACLU was aguing thousands of ballots were already sent out without the ID requirement so it should be put on hold.

My arguement is if voter fraud is so important, then the state shouldn't be mailing absentee ballots out regardless of mailing in a copy of your ID. Voters should have to show up on a day two weeks before election and prove who they are before recieving an absentee ballot. One day should be enough.

If you can't be bothered to show up and prove who you are, why should you be allowed to vote.

Gotcha, yes there needs to be a way to validate every ballot, absentee or otherwise.

 

[lopri]

After reading the article it looks like the absentee ballots are mailed to the voter. The ACLU was aguing thousands of ballots were already sent out without the ID requirement so it should be put on hold.

My arguement is if voter fraud is so important, then the state shouldn't be mailing absentee ballots out regardless of mailing in a copy of your ID. Voters should have to show up on a day two weeks before election and prove who they are before recieving an absentee ballot. One day should be enough.

If you can't be bothered to show up and prove who you are, why should you be allowed to vote.

I agree totally and I hope you do not change your opinion in the face of how most military personnel vote. :biggrin:

 

[sportage]

These things never go as expected.
The minorities will have plenty of time to get that ID.
Where as the typical republican soccer mom is way too busy.
Poetic justice via Antonin Scalia and SCOTUS.

 

[glenn1]

I agree totally and I hope you do not change your opinion in the face of how most military personnel vote. :biggrin:

All military personnel have an official government issued ID so I don't see what the issue is. If you want to come up with rules about who can verify the person's identity via that ID when they're overseas, be my guest. Personally I think allowing a military officer to sign that their identity has been validated is sufficient, but am open to other ideas.

And in any event, the fact there is additional work needed to ensure that absentee vote fraud doesn't occur in no way reduces the justification for in-person Voter ID. Admittedly I think "strict" voter ID laws are overkill and counter-productive, but that doesn't impact the larger picture.

 

[Oldgamer]

Conservatards would have an aneurysm. MARK OF THE BEAST blah blah blah.

LOL so fucking true it isn't even funny. :biggrin:

 

[Oldgamer]

To my understanding all this Judge did for Texas was say you can't do this now since we are past the deadline for making changes. He didn't actually rule on this he just put a stay on it for now till after the elections. So the Texas one is still up for pressing forward after these elections. We are like what 28 days away from election day? So yea this would have caused mass confusion at the polls. Also it would affect people who have already sent in their out of state voter registrations. There just isn't enough time right now to make changes and get everyone informed.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

To my understanding all this Judge did for Texas was say you can't do this now since we are past the deadline for making changes. He didn't actually rule on this he just put a stay on it for now till after the elections. So the Texas one is still up for pressing forward after these elections. We are like what 28 days away from election day? So yea this would have caused mass confusion at the polls. Also it would affect people who have already sent in their out of state voter registrations. There just isn't enough time right now to make changes and get everyone informed.

The Texas law was struck down saying it amounted to a poll tax due to the burdensome effect and costs people would need to incur to meet the requirements without demonstrating an actual quantifiable need for the law in the first place.

 

[brycejones]

The Texas law was struck down saying it amounted to a poll tax due to the burdensome effect and costs people would need to incur to meet the requirements without demonstrating an actual quantifiable need for the law in the first place.

I think the most damning part of the ruling in the Texas case was the finding that it was deliberately enacted to dis-enfranchise minority voters.

 

[smackababy]

Am I the only person who finds it a bit ridiculous that there is some idea that a person who is able to muster the fortitude required to register to vote can't do the same and pay the $18 it takes to obtain a state ID? In IL, you have to have a state ID to even register... So, who is voting without an ID? There can't possibly be voters being turned away in droves because they are unable to get a valid ID.

 

[Paratus]

I agree totally and I hope you do not change your opinion in the face of how most military personnel vote. :biggrin:

Of course not.

All military personnel have an official government issued ID so I don't see what the issue is. If you want to come up with rules about who can verify the person's identity via that ID when they're overseas, be my guest. Personally I think allowing a military officer to sign that their identity has been validated is sufficient, but am open to other ideas.

And in any event, the fact there is additional work needed to ensure that absentee vote fraud doesn't occur in no way reduces the justification for in-person Voter ID. Admittedly I think "strict" voter ID laws are overkill and counter-productive, but that doesn't impact the larger picture.

If military personnel can show up in person with their IDs to receive an absentee ballot, I don't see what the problem is. If they can't why would we risk the integrity of the system to allow people who voluntarily are out of their voting area to submit possiblly falsified ballots. Maybe if there was a draft I could see setting something up for personnel overseas.

But if voter ID has taught us anything, as long as there is legal way to vote, rampant disenfranchisement is the fault of the individual voter for failing to follow the law. No special treatment for great-grandma who doesn't have an ID, some guy serving in the military overseas, newly divorced women who haven't changed their ID to match their name, or oil field employees on travel to the middle east.

Stopping one false ballot in 100 million is worth 100,000s of disenfranchised lazy voters.

I'm sure you agree with me.

 

[glenn1]

Of course not.

If military personnel can show up in person with their IDs to receive an absentee ballot, I don't see what the problem is. If they can't why would we risk the integrity of the system to allow people who voluntarily are out of their voting area to submit possiblly falsified ballots. Maybe if there was a draft I could see setting something up for personnel overseas.

But if voter ID has taught us anything, as long as there is legal way to vote, rampant disenfranchisement is the fault of the individual voter for failing to follow the law. No special treatment for great-grandma who doesn't have an ID, some guy serving in the military overseas, newly divorced women who haven't changed their ID to match their name, or oil field employees on travel to the middle east.

Stopping one false ballot in 100 million is worth 100,000s of disenfranchised lazy voters.

I'm sure you agree with me.

Then I'm sure that you'll agree with me that if ID shouldn't be required to vote, it shouldn't be required for the exercise of any other right, such as purchasing a firearm. Either that or voters should need to prove their identity via same alternate means as the TSA or financial institutions use such as provision of non-public information about the voter which can then be verified through a consumer reporting agency, public database, or other source. Letting someone simply take a utility bill out of someone else's mailbox and use that as "proof of identity" to vote is complete and utter bullshit and every progressive knows it.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

I think the most damning part of the ruling in the Texas case was the finding that it was deliberately enacted to dis-enfranchise minority voters.

You'd think the most damning thing would be the fact that the GOP has had to repeatedly admit, in open court, that there really aren't any cases of voter fraud the the ID laws are designed to prevent and that they have no evidence that the laws will prevent voter fraud in the future.

 

[Brainonska511]

Am I the only person who finds it a bit ridiculous that there is some idea that a person who is able to muster the fortitude required to register to vote can't do the same and pay the $18 it takes to obtain a state ID? In IL, you have to have a state ID to even register... So, who is voting without an ID? There can't possibly be voters being turned away in droves because they are unable to get a valid ID.

That is incorrect.

What forms of identification may be needed when I register to vote?
Two forms of identification with at least one showing your current residence address is needed when you register in-person. If you register by mail sufficient proof of identity is required by submission of your driver's license number or State identification card number. If you don't have either of those, verification by the last 4 digits of the your social security number, a copy of a current and valid photo identification, or a copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, government check, or other government document that shows your name and address will be required. A person may also demonstrate sufficient proof of identity by submission of a photo identification issued by a college or university accompanied by either a copy of the applicant's contract or lease for a residence or any postmarked mail delivered to the applicant at his or her current residence address.

 

[Texashiker]

I am pretty sure when the full case is heard voters id laws will be upheld.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

I am pretty sure when the full case is heard voters id laws will be upheld.

Beauty of it is, not one soul gives a wet fart in a tin cup about what you are sure and unsure of.

 

[Texashiker]

Beauty of it is, not one soul gives a wet fart in a tin cup about what you are sure and unsure of.

When voter id laws are finally upheld liberals are going to stroke. The roberts led supreme court will probably be branded the worst court ever.

But then again liberals will continue to demand more gun control..

Liberals are hypocrites. They would gladly deny certain groups their rights to promote an agenda.

 

[Victorian Gray]

aclu once again fighting for law breakers.

The ACLU, once again fighting for *your* rights.