Supreme Court Faces an Array of Divisive Cases – New York Times
Voting Rights
Challengers to Indiana’s two-year-old voter identification law, which requires current government-issued photo ID, call it the “most onerous” such law in the country. Voters lacking the proper identification have 10 days to obtain it in order for their provisional ballots to be counted.
A federal appeals court upheld the law, finding that it would prevent fraud while not keeping many people from the polls. The plaintiffs maintain that the poor and elderly would face a disproportionate burden. The underlying question is how the justices will evaluate the competing interests of preventing fraud and protecting access. The cases are Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, No. 07-21, and Indiana Democratic Party v. Rokita, No. 07-25.
I was most surprised by the “Voting Rights” paragraph. I am surprised because this case should seemingly come after any cases about electronic voting machines, specifically with regard to corporations such as Diebold. It hardly makes any sense to mandate government-issued photo-IDs if a machine can otherwise verify identity. Of course, this could be my ardent liberal bias, trying to trounce rules that would allow me to defraud an election – our side is the one known for doing that, after-all.
All of the cases suggest what I feared when writing for the libertal rag on campus years ago – we’ve allowed a group of conservative activist judges to sit on the bench and hear only cases that will forward an agenda unbecoming of our great nation’s history.
No Comments »