GOP, Dems split over Supreme Court OK of Indiana voter ID law. More to come?

In a rather decisive 6-3 vote, the Supreme Court today approved an Indiana law requiring voter identification at the polls, which is likely to prompt other states to adopt similar measures against voter fraud.

Democrats, lead by -- who else? -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, immediately denounced the ruling as placing a "roadblock to democracy" by requiring all voters to produce some form of official state identification before being allowed to vote.

Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens said, "Indiana's own experience with fraudulent voting in the 2003 Democratic primary for East Chicago mayor — though perpetrated using absentee ballots and not in-person fraud — demonstrate that not only is the risk of voter fraud real but that it could affect the outcome of a close election."

Thus, he wrote, the state has a legitimate interest "in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process."

The Court dismissed Democratic arguments that because the law had been supported by Republican state legislators and opposed by Democrats that it should be invalidated.

It also rejected the Democratic argument that the law places....

...undue burden on young and old voters who may not have valid state ID. The law's opponents did not produce one plaintiff who had been so inconvenienced or disenfranchised.

More than 20 states have imposed some kind of ID voting requirement. The Court's decision, which was opposed by Justices David Souter, Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, is likely to encourage other states to follow suit.

It came just 8 days before the next Indiana election, the crucial Democratic primary that pits Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama against each other in their marathon struggle for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination.

Here's a shock. The Republican National Committee liked the decision. And although he was not asked for identification, someone who resembled House Republican Leader John Boehner praised the decision. "In the world’s oldest and most respected democracy, we can never permit those who seek to defraud the electoral process to succeed."

Over at the American Princess blog, they asked a relevant question: "Wait! How will people vote more than once now?"

--Andrew Malcolm

Comments

[KYJurisDoctor]

It was a very sound decision!

[Terry Black]

Has anyone, anywhere demonstrated that in-person voter fraud is a problem? If not, it seems you're creating a real problem in order to solve an imaginary one.

[Brittanicus]

Today's Supreme Court ruling that approves states' efforts to pass a voter identification law, now should be enacted within every state within the union. California should especially adopt a law requiring ID, because of a massive illegal immigration issue fermenting within it's borders. States with faint-hearted Governors, Mayor and city managers such as Los Angeles county who live under a overcast suspicion of voter fraud; specially when proposition 187 was resisted and dismissed without going to the upper courts. Millions of illegal aliens subsist in the border states and are sucking those states budgets dry, compliments of the parasite employers. It is all encompassing your Jobs and economic growth, energy independence, health care access, education and an overcrowded prison system. All these issues are impacted by the 12 to 30 million illegal immigration invasion.

Find out the unsuppressed truth at these websites: GRASSFIRE, NUMBERSUSA, JUDICIAL WATCH, LIBERTY POST, IMMIGRATION NEWS INDEXER, UNIPAC and VDARE.

Please copy and paste and distribute freely where you can!

This is the only source you need to contact your representative at http://www.outsourcecongress.org/outsource/congress/schstaffers.html

[Of course,Dems want illegal aliens to vote.]

As most voter fraud is perpetrated in the dems favor,dont
bet they will support any effort to protect the integrity of
our democracy. Shocking vice and moral bankrutcy best
caracterize the dems nomenclatura.

[Villajarios]

At least in one state, the Marxists won't be able to parade dead people to the polliing booths; register the same wellfare-mom three times in one day in different counties; and get away with shinanigan after shinanigan.
Honest people have nothing to fear by showing ID at the polling place. Democrater, lberals and Marxists obviously have much to lose when the light of truth scorches their insipid ways.

[Sabatu]

I can't believe people are even complaining about this, the processing fee for a state issued I.D. in Indiana is 13$ and 10$ or FREE if you are 65 or disabled and can provide proper documentation (http://www.dmv.org/in-indiana/id-cards.php). All you have to do is go down to the DMV, fill out the form, and pay the processing fee to get a state-issued I.D. Whats difficult/elitist about that? If you can't fill out a form you shouldn't be able to vote in the first place. Do people even look into these things before they openly bash them? While reading some comments you'd get the impression that the processing fee is more in the range of $1000 or so.

[Gaily]

This ruling is a victory for every American citizen.

[Ken Jaggers]

You can't legally get on an airplane without proper ID.
You can't legally have a bank account without proper ID.
You can't legally cash a check without proper ID.
You cant't legally cross the border withot proper ID.
You can't legally obtain a driver's license without proper ID.
You can't legally obtain a loan without proper ID.
You can't legally obtain a job without proper ID.

So what's the big deal about applying these standards to voting?

Are the proponents of no ID saying that they don't want the same standards to apply to the electoral process?

If so, aren't they in fact saying that they are in favor of having illegality within the electroral processes.

That's nonsence!!!

[Grabit]

Terry Black hit it on the nose. A phantom "problem" led to this case. At least Justice Stevens wisely left the door open for different cases with different facts.

The so-called voter fraud "problem" reminds me of Mark Twain's comment about LAST OF THE MOHICANS: "It's about an extinct tribe that never existed."

[Grabit]

Sabatu, with the exception of you and Gaily, I'd say that the people who agree with you in this blog can't even spell, let alone fill out a form. So they shouldn't be allowed to vote, either.

[hammerdown]

3,000,000 new democrat voters
-45,000 without ID
___________________________
total net gain = WIN FOR DEMS

[Tim]

Keep in mind that those who vote with absentee ballots in Indiana do not use a photo ID. Signature verification is enough. You simply do not need a photo anymore. Signature verification is advanced and accurate.

[Paul]

When the Dems control Congress and the Presidency, suddenly Republicans will care more about voting machines. Right now, they think the whole issue of voter fraud with machines is bogus. When they are on the losing end, they will suddenly show an interest in that issue. For now, they are content only to go after
voter fraud without photo IDs. That will change.

[Sabatu]

GrabIt:

I couldn't agree with you more; If only people who had a valid, constructive viewpoint on the subject would post, and not people who submit cheap personal attacks or their hatred of the democratic or republican parties.