General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWI Ass't AG argues laws restricting voting weren't shown to be discriminatory by intention
and so a federal can't strike down the raft of new laws passed and approved by completely GOP controlled WI state gov't
----------------------------------
"Assistant Wisconsin Attorney General Clay Kawski said in court Thursday the judge can't toss more than a dozen laws passed since 2011 because there isn't evidence that they were passed with the intention to discriminate against non-white and young voters.
<snip>
Attorney Bruce Van Spiva argues that evidence shows Republicans intended for the state's voter identification requirement to suppress Democratic voters in Milwaukee and college campuses.
The judge has said he will rule by August."
http://www.channel3000.com/news/judge-to-hear-closing-arguments-in-wisconsin-voting-lawsuit/40292328
dembotoz
(16,799 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)And the choice to argue that 'intent' of the law as the key issue rather then 'effect' of the law is rather telling.
mythology
(9,527 posts)Given that so many others in other states have, and given that it's the obvious outcome, it's a rather silly claim that the laws aren't intended to discriminate.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)or was it just some random law-making that went bad?
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)I haven't read this particular Ass't AG's comments on that
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)The fact that discrimination is involved is just a happy coincidence for them.
riversedge
(70,199 posts)judge seems to be dismissing these admissions!!
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/attorneys-argue-wisconsin-election-laws-discriminatory-40250155
Judge: 'Decent Case' Political Role in Wisconsin Voting Laws
By scott bauer, associated press
MADISON, Wis. Jun 30, 2016, 1:13 PM ET
........... He referenced comments from Republican U.S. Rep. Glenn Grothman, made in an interview in April, that he thought the voter ID law would help Republicans in the November election. Peterson said he didn't think the evidence showed it would help Republicans significantly, or that it would hurt Democrats as much as was argued.
The plaintiffs argue that the laws discriminate against the poor, racial minorities and younger voters who are more inclined to vote Democratic. The state Department of Justice counters that they have not suppressed turnout and the state works hard to ensure everyone who needs a free ID to vote gets one.
Attorney Bruce Van Spiva argued that if the judge finds any parts of the laws are discriminatory, he must rule the entire laws unconstitutional and block enforcement. He said the evidence showed Republicans were motivated to pass the laws to suppress Democratic turnout and there was no need to make the changes.
He cited testimony of Todd Allbaugh, who was chief of staff to then state-Sen. Dale Schultz, a Republican. Allbaugh testified that Republican senators said in a closed-door meeting discussing the voter ID law that it was needed to improve the GOP's chances of winning elections by reducing turnout in urban areas and college campuses.
But the judge raised questions about whether Allbaugh's testimony could be trusted, given that he left the Republican Party partly out of disgust over passage of the voter ID law.
"It's score settling. I'm not doubting his real sincerity but his perspective is hostile to his former party," Peterson said. "He feels betrayed."................
riversedge
(70,199 posts)Ari Berman
?@AriBerman
Wisconsin voter ID trial ends today. GOP bragged about disenfranchising blacks & students https://www.thenation.com/article/the-gops-war-on-voting-is-working/