You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Supreme Court to rule on voter ID laws: "ruling could affect outcome in races in several states" [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-25-07 11:34 AM
Original message
Supreme Court to rule on voter ID laws: "ruling could affect outcome in races in several states"
Advertisements [?]
LAT: Supreme Court to rule on voter ID laws
By David G. Savage, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 25, 2007

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court set the stage today for an election-year clash over whether states can require voters to have a government-issued photo identification before they cast a ballot. The court's ruling could affect the outcome in close races in several states.

The photo identification laws have been championed by Republicans as a means of preventing voter fraud. They say the required identification will screen out ineligible voters, including felons, illegal immigrants and non-residents. A state-issued driver's license meets the requirement.

Democrats have opposed the requirement and argue that thousands of poor, elderly or disabled persons do not have a photo identification because they do not drive. They fear the rules are likely to dissuade an untold number of voters from casting ballots, and thereby might tip a close election. In addition, they say fraudulent voting is more likely among those who file absentee ballots by mail, and the voter identification rule usually does not extend to such voters.

Photo identification laws have been adopted in several states, including Indiana, Georgia and Arizona, and they have been generally upheld.

The issue has not only divided state legislators along partisan lines, but the same split has been apparent in the judicial rulings. The U.S. appeals court in Chicago upheld Indiana's law on 2-1 vote. Two Republican appointees made up the majority, while a Democratic appointee dissented....

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-scotus26sep26,0,4520090.story?coll=la-home-center
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC