Oops

[Goober McTuber]

(CNN) - Wisconsin became the latest state to have its voter identification law struck down by the courts, with a federal judge in Milwaukee on Tuesday concluding that opponents of the requirement have shown it has a "disproportionate impact" on many voters.

Judge Lynn Adelman in Milwaukee ruled the requirement that voters present one of nine forms of government-approved photo ID was in violation of the landmark Voting Rights Act. He issued an injunction blocking enforcement of the law. A state judge had earlier tossed out the law on similar legal grounds.

Wisconsin officials had argued there was a legitimate government interest to prevent voter fraud and impersonation, by requiring those casting ballots to prove their identity.

However, "Act 23 serves the state's interest in orderly election administration and accurate recordkeeping only to the extent that it serves the state's interest in detecting and preventing voter fraud," concluded Adelman. "Act 23 weakly serves the latter interest."

He added "Perhaps the reason why photo ID requirements have no effect on confidence or trust in the electoral process is that such laws undermine the public's confidence in the electoral process as much as they promote it."

The state's Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, responded, saying, "I am disappointed with the order and continue to believe Wisconsin’s law is constitutional. We will appeal."

It is unclear whether separate appeals of the state and now federal rulings will be resolved before November's statewide elections.

The decision comes a week after a state judge in Arkansas dismissed that state's voter ID law. Courts in Texas, Pennsylvania, and Missouri, have recently done the same.

Thirty states in the U.S. have some form of voter identification law, including 12 that require a photo ID, like Wisconsin. At least a dozen other states have pending or proposed laws in the legislature.

Various coalitions of private plaintiffs, civil rights groups, and the federal government have filed challenges to laws in some states, and have generally been successful on stopping enforcement, at least temporarily.

The issue has become a key part of the Obama administration's domestic agenda.

"Across the country, Republicans have led efforts to pass laws making it harder, not easier, for people to vote," President Barack Obama said in an April 11 speech before the National Action Network. "I want to be clear–I am not against reasonable attempts to secure the ballot. We understand that there has to be rules in place. But I am against requiring an ID that millions of Americans don't have. That shouldn't suddenly prevent you from exercising your right to vote."

His supporters say such laws discriminate against minorities, given that a large percentage of minority voters do not have state-issued identification cards. Nationwide, the NAACP claims a quarter of African-Americans and 16% of Latinos of voting age lack a current government-issued photo ID.

"This law had robbed many Wisconsin citizens of their right to vote. Today, the court made it clear those discriminatory actions cannot stand," said Karyn Rotker, Wisconsin senior staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.

The U.S. Supreme Court in 2008 allowed Indiana's voter ID law to stand, saying at the time the stated goal of stopping voter fraud was a legitimate exercise of legislative power. And the conservative-majority court last June struck down the key enforcement provision of the Voting Rights Act, making it harder for the federal government to have oversight over voting regulations in states with a past history of discrimination at the polls.

Many conservative lawmakers have said the voter ID requirements have not inhibited the ability of minorities to vote.

"The interesting thing about voting patterns now is in this last election African-Americans voted at a higher percentage than whites in almost every one of the states that were under the special provisions of the federal government," Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, said last August, in response to the high court's ruling. He said he had no problem with photo ID laws. "So really, I don't think there is objective evidence that we're precluding African-Americans from voting any longer."

The Wisconsin case is Frank v. Walker (11-cv-1128).

[Sirfindafold]

liberalism is a mental disorder.

[Left Seater]

Barack Obama..."But I am against requiring an ID that millions of Americans don't have. That shouldn't suddenly prevent you from exercising your right to vote."

His supporters say such laws discriminate against minorities, given that a large percentage of minority voters do not have state-issued identification cards. Nationwide, the NAACP claims a quarter of African-Americans and 16% of Latinos of voting age lack a current government-issued photo ID.

Never mind the fact that every state has a photo ID requirement already in place that has nothing to do with voting. So instead of helping these alleged 25% and 16% that are already violating laws obtain photo IDs the left would rather they continue breaking the existing laws.


But the real reason the left doesn't want photo IDs to vote has nothing to do with minorities. They are a very unreliable voting block anyway, just like young people. The real reason is because it will prevent the type of fraud that I saw first hand in New England and Philly, which would severely hurt the left's candidates. This is family members voting for their parents or siblings or cousins, etc. It was openly discussed at work and even in the officiating circles how an adult child would vote legally for himself and then drive a few towns over and vote for his dad who was in Florida or Arizona. As long as you have the name and address you can do this all day long, and most don't consider it fraud.

[Smackie Chan]

the real reason the left doesn't want photo IDs to vote has nothing to do with minorities. They are a very unreliable voting block anyway, just like young people. The real reason is because it will prevent the type of fraud that I saw first hand in New England and Philly, which would severely hurt the left's candidates. This is family members voting for their parents or siblings or cousins, etc. It was openly discussed at work and even in the officiating circles how an adult child would vote legally for himself and then drive a few towns over and vote for his dad who was in Florida or Arizona. As long as you have the name and address you can do this all day long, and most don't consider it fraud.

Who are most? How is this not fraud in anyone's book? You know, as in one person, one vote, with that one person being who you are legally identified as?

[Left Seater]

So one day when I worked for a large government defense contractor I am having lunch with 6 or 7 folks waiting for the division president to show up so we can head back to Boston. These are all white collar engineers and finance types. It also happens to be election day in 2004. One guy makes a comment that he hopes the div pres shows up soon so we can get home because he still has to cast his dad's vote and his brothers vote who are both away from home. Another guy said he already voted early for his dad who was in Florida. I of course asked if they were ok committing voter fraud, and the whole table laffed. Plenty of comments followed about how I didn't know how the real world worked, etc.

I also saw neighbors, officials, and other coworkers also do the same.

[Moving Sale]

The proven cases of voter fraud are so small that they are de minimis non curat lex.

LS,
Did you call the authorities?

[Left Seater]

No. We moved.


I also agree that the proven cases are extremely small. That is mostly because it is damn near impossible to prove with the current requirements.

[Moving Sale]

Personally I think you should have done something. It's your civic duty.

[Left Seater]

Hind sight is 20/20 and all that.

Not as easy to do then when financial security for a newly married guy was top of mind.

[Moving Sale]

Doing the right thing is sometimes (usually?) hard, but I'm sure you did your best under the (tuff) circumstances. Just don't let it happen again.

[Sirfindafold]

Did you call the authorities?

[Screw_Michigan]

^^^ Go fuck yourself, cunt.

[Waynegro]

Did you call the authorities?

That silly negro isn't qualified to run the Subway where SM cleans up the mess below the bathroom glory hole.