Supreme Court Gives Republicans a Boost

[Echo In Light]

{...a boost? again?}

Supreme Court Gives Republicans a Boost
by Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON - In a decision with major implications for the November national elections, the U.S. Supreme Court Monday upheld a controversial state law that Democrats and a number of national civil rights groups believe could undermine the right of tens of thousands of poor and minority voters to cast ballots.

Six of the court’s nine justices ruled that Indiana’s voter-identification law, which requires all voters to produce a government-issued photo identification at their polling places, did not violate the Constitution, as Democrats and a number of national civil rights organisations had argued.

Writing for the majority, Justine John Paul Stevens asserted that the state had a “valid interest” in preventing voter fraud and that, “on the basis of the record that has been made in this litigation, we cannot conclude that the statute imposes ‘excessively burdensome requirements’ on any class of voters.”

Noting that the law was passed by the Republican-dominated legislature and signed by the state’s Republican governor, Stevens noted that “simply because partisan interests may have provided one motivation for the votes of individual legislators” did not invalidate other justifications for the law.

But three of the justices said they disagreed. “Indiana’s ‘Voter ID law’ threatens to impose a nontrivial burden on the voting right of tens of thousands of the state’s citizens, and a significant percentage of those individuals are likely to be deterred from voting,” wrote Justice David Souter, who also noted that the state had failed to offer evidence that voter fraud of the kind the law was purportedly designed to address was a significant problem.

Democrats also decried the majority’s conclusion. “The court’s decision today places obstacles to the fundamental rights of American citizens — especially the poor, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities — to participate in the electoral process,” said the speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/29/8590/

[Perry Logan]

1. Like the media, the Supreme Court exists to ease the Right's fall as much as possible.

[Echo In Light]

2. Fall...fall?...what is this "fall" you speak of?

:sarcasm:

[Perry Logan]

5. The Right are GOIN DOWN, BABY!

[Echo In Light]

8. Maybe. Or they'll simply create another crisis and rely on M$M to re-package the friendly fascism

[KharmaTrain]

3. This Court Is Effectively Inoperative

What I fear is in a few months, the case involving "Executive Privilidge" will rush its way up the chain...the firewall that this regime is hiding behind to protects its crimes...and there will be the Scalia and his gang ready to protect their masters. The real problem here is Kennedy...he's now the swing vote and you can always count on him to go with Scalia when it comes to helping his political benefactors.

Just the fact that this court could get even more wingnutty is and should be a major issue in this election...but like in '04, no one seems to be paying attention.

[Clear Blue Sky]

4. Just like in 2000....n/t

[Triana]

6. what else is new? and the psychopath Scalia at the helm of them n/t

[madrchsod]

7. no problem....organize!

local church groups can bus the seniors and others to the to get photo id`s. the local democratic party workers can take those who can`t drive to the their photo id`s. get the word out to everyone they do`t want you to vote.

the reason most states will not go to this id is that it costs to much money and time...indiana should pay the cost for their stupidity...



do`t mourn -organize!

[Echo In Light]

9. Sound idea!

[madrchsod]

10. and who has the most experience in organizing?

hillary people or the millions of barack supporters?

[Supersedeas]

11. placing the burden of proof on those who allege voter fraud before restricting access to the ballot

how quaint of Justice Souter

[VP505]

12. Speaking of proof,

we have a court decision on a nonexistent problem, or at least one that has never been proven to exist.

[Supersedeas]

13. it's a problem -- only a partisan one -- Repig need to restrict voter access to come close to

winning any election -- ideas (tax breaks for the super wealthy has run its course)