The Supreme Court appeared unmoved yesterday by arguments that an Indiana law requiring voters to present photo identification imposes an unconstitutional burden. Some justices, however, appeared to search for a middle ground on the divisive and partisan political issue.
Experts on voting rights see the legal battle over Indiana’s toughest-in-the-nation voter identification law as the most starkly partisan case to reach the court since Bush v. Gore decided the presidential election in 2000…
I guess it’s our turn to suffer. The Consevative world spoke of nothing but the "Warren Court" for years. Now it’s our turn with the "Roberts Court." This case is about requiring a photo I.D. to vote. It probably doesn’t even matter in the long run. But the motive for the law is clear – the possibility of disenfranchizing monority voters – Rove‘s grand scheme. So the Justices are "unmoved." I expect they’ll continue to be "unmoved" and "unmovable" for a very long time…
| 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 |
[I’m addicted to posting and reposting this table]
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.