Supreme Court leaves intact Wisconsin voter identification law
Source: Reuters
BY LAWRENCE HURLEY
(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday left intact a new Republican-backed law in Wisconsin that requires voters to present photo identification when they cast ballots.
The court declined to hear an appeal filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, which challenged the law.
Voter identification laws have been put in place in a number of Republican-governed states over the objection of many Democrats. Republicans in Wisconsin and other states say such rules are needed to prevent voter fraud. Democrats say the laws are intended to suppress the turnout of minorities and other groups that tend to voter for Democrats.
In October, the court temporarily blocked the Wisconsin law. It did not explain its reasoning at the time, but it was most likely because the statute was being implemented so close to the November election, which could have caused confusion and disruption.
FULL story at link.
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/23/us-usa-court-election-idUSKBN0MJ1DZ20150323
Romeo.lima333
(1,127 posts)voting and lack of it have consequences - you can thank the voting righties and the non- voting lefties for this
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)BumRushDaShow
(129,802 posts)Not sure how far it will get through our GOP-majority legislature, but not all of the GOP here are RW loons (at least according to my Dem. reps) and we do now have a Dem governor.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)BumRushDaShow
(129,802 posts)I asked my new State Senator about something like that along with the idea of early voting, as neither subject has ever been broached AT ALL in any media here (as far as I'm aware), nor have I seen the subject brought up from any of the party literature... And he said that the subject has come up once or twice during "lunches" and casual conversations, etc. And sadly, that seems to suggest that it is a a non-starter for now. Am not sure why, although maybe because sometimes, this state can be so in to "tradition" that they can't fathom a change like this (although "Voter ID" seemed to have no problem jumping right on the table as a voting "change" .
I wouldn't be surprised if they tried Voter ID again (given what I saw today about Wisconsin and the Supreme Court uphold of their law).... But fortunately, having a Democratic governor now to block further travel down that road, will certainly help over the next 4 years.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Gothmog
(145,752 posts)Texas' and Wisconsin's laws are very different from the Indiana law in that case.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)best court money can buy.......
Gothmog
(145,752 posts)I know one of the attorneys representing the good guys in the Texas voter id case which is scheduled for oral arguments on April 28. The attorneys representing Texas plaintiffs did not want the ACLU to seek cert. in the Wisconsin case. The Texas case is a stronger case. The DOJ is a party in the Texas case and there are express findings of fact as to intentional discrimination in the Texas case.
Here are Prof. Hasen's observations http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71186
Had the Court agreed to hear the Wisconsin case, it is possible it would have read Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act even more narrowly in cases of vote denial, as well as make bad law on the scope of the equal protection clause. In this way, the Courts refusal to hear Wisconsins voter id case may be a blessing in disguise. As Ive long argued, the best way for liberals to cut their losses is to stay out of the Supreme Court when possible. Things could have been worse if the Court took Wisconsin than if they didnt. And if you trust Justice Ginsburg, trust her her in not voting to grant cert in this case.
I think that the Texas case is the stronger case and would be a better case to reach SCOTUS
alp227
(32,068 posts)So can those lacking the means to obtain voter ID just opt for mail-in ballots?