dirty tricks continue…

Posted on Friday 4 January 2008


A pair of closely watched voting rights cases headed to the Supreme Court next week could have a greater effect on the 2008 elections than anything happening in Iowa or New Hampshire. The high court will hear oral arguments Jan. 9 in two cases challenging the validity of an Indiana law that requires voters to produce photo identification in order to cast ballots. Court watchers say the high court’s opinion will center on the question of what standard should be used in balancing individual voter rights against Indiana’s interest in conducting fair elections.

Opponents of the law argue it is an unconstitutional burden on voters. They say the Supreme Court should give the law “strict scrutiny” and reject it because Indiana cannot cite a single instance of voter fraud that the statute would have prevented.Supporters say that the court should see the law as a reasonable requirement that does not unduly deprive anyone of the right to vote. A federal district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit both decided the Indiana cases in the state’s favor. Voter identification laws in other states also have been challenged in court.

The standard of review that the Supreme Court is expected to outline in the cases, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board and Indiana Democratic Party et al. v. Rokita et al., would then apply in other legal challenges to voter identification requirements across the nation. “It could potentially transform election law in this country,” said Deborah Goldberg of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s School of Law, who opposes the Indiana statute.

Both sides have been forced to rely on thin empirical evidence. While Indiana cannot cite any cases of preventable voter fraud, neither can the law’s challengers point to specific people who would not be able to vote because of the law, which has not taken effect…
Later in the article, one Law Professor says:
Bradley A. Smith, a Capital University law professor and former Federal Election Commission chairman, said the Supreme Court should take "a wait-and-see attitude" on the issue until a fuller record is developed. "There may be much less at stake in this case than meets the eye," Smith said.
My take is different. This law was passed as part of the Republican "Voter Fraud" Fraud. It’s a Karl Rove myth that the Democrats are registering people who shouldn’t be able to vote, or false voters, or some such thing. There are no instances of this allegation, anywhere. The idea is to intimidate minority voters or others who live on the lower edge of our world, and probably don’t have a photo I.D. or know how to get one. There are definitely instances of voter harassment at the polls around this issue. In short – it’s a dirty trick. Nothing more. They’re spinning voter intimidation as voter reform. Why not go back to a poll tax and literacy tests? or marching in the streets wearing sheets?

These people don’t know how to quit. The whole U.S. Attorney Scandal was about this Republican "Voter Fraud" Fraud tactic. But allow me to repeat the problem we have:

THE SUPREME COURT
JUSTICE PRESIDENT APPOINTED

John Paul Stevens President Gerald Ford December 19, 1975
Antonin Scalia President Ronald Reagan September 26, 1986
Anthony M. Kennedy President Ronald Reagan February 18, 1988
David Hackett Souter President George H.W. Bush October 9, 1990
Clarence Thomas President George H.W. Bush October 23, 1991
Ruth Bader Ginsburg President Bill Clinton August 10, 1993
Stephen G. Breyer President Bill Clinton August 3, 1994
John G. Roberts President George W. Bush September 29, 2005
Samuel Anthony Alito President George W. Bush January 31, 2006

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.