April 28, 2008
Thanks, Justice Stevens. No. Really. Thanks a lot.
Well, our Supreme Court has decided that Jim Crow is A-OK...
The 6-3 vote allows Indiana to require the identification when it holds its statewide primary next week. It also will give most state legislatures time to revise their voter laws for the November elections.This was perhaps the biggest voter rights case taken up by the justices since the 2000 dispute over Florida's ballots, in which George W. Bush prevailed to gain the presidency.
At issue was whether state laws designed to stem voter fraud end up disenfranchising large numbers of Americans who might lack proper documents to prove their voting eligibility. The case raised important constitutional questions, but also involved race and partisan politics.
Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens said any political issues considered by the state were mitigated by its desire to stop voter fraud.
"The state interests identified as justifications for [the law] are both neutral and sufficiently strong to require us to reject" the lawsuit, he wrote.
But in a toughly worded dissent, Justice David Souter said "Indiana has made no such justification" for the statute "and as to some aspects of its law, it hardly even tried."
Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita has conceded the state has never presented a case of "voter impersonation," which the law was designed to safeguard against. The 2005 Indiana law requires that a valid photo identification be presented by a person casting a ballot at a polling stations. Previously, most citizens needed only to sign a poll book to vote.
So, though there is no need for it, and in spite of it's cost which makes it a de facto poll tax, voter ID is good idea?
So much for this idea that the Republicans don't like activist judges. All the R appointees were in the majority along with old Justice Stevens. Seriously, man, why couldn't you have retired when Clinton was in office?
At this point, I don't want to hear another goddamn word from anyone about NOT voting for the Democrat in November, regardless of who that person is. Seriously, I'm ready to lose friends over this, mostly because I'm sick of your shit. If I can suck it up, so can you.
It's time y'all realize there's more than some petty soundbite at stake and stop playing the 'I don't like Obama/Hillary' song.
Posted by mcblogger at April 28, 2008 01:53 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.mcblogger.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/3344
Comments
I voted for Obama because I thought he had the best chances of beating McCain. Clinton had the better health care plan, so I am voting for the Democrat in November regardless of who it is.
People had best vote their wallet rather than trumped up social issues this time.
Posted by: McIndependant
at April 28, 2008 05:07 PM
Amen... though I'm relatively certain there will still be mouthbreathers somewhere in Texas earning minimum wage and voting Republican.
Or just not voting.
Posted by: mcblogger
at April 28, 2008 08:15 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

