0 Comment(s)
April 29, 2008 at 7:49am
by thecodepounder The U.S. Extreme Court on Monday upheld an Indiana law requiring voters to produce photo identification in order to cast their vote.
The law “is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting ‘the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,’” Justice John Paul Stevens said in an opinion that was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy.
Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas also agreed with the outcome, but wrote separately.
Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter dissented
I haven’t given this much thought, but off the cuff I don’t have any particular problem with this. I mean, my mother doesn’t drive any more, so I can easily see where seniors might be inconvenienced by this requirement, at least those who don’t drive any more and therefore don’t have a driver’s license. But, of course, a driver’s license is not the only form of photo ID available.
[Justice] Stevens said the partisan divide in Indiana, as well as elsewhere, was noteworthy. But he said that preventing fraud and inspiring voter confidence were legitimate goals of the law, regardless of who backed or opposed it.
Indiana provides IDs free of charge to the poor and allows voters who lack photo ID to cast a provisional ballot and then show up within 10 days at their county courthouse to produce identification or otherwise attest to their identity.
Stevens said these provisions also help reduce the burden on people who lack driver licenses.
So, the extenuating circumstances in Indiana were significant to the decision. This means that it’s not a blanket approval of all voter photo ID laws–other states’ voter photo ID requirements may not pass constitutional scrutiny.
0 Comments
There are no comments yet, be the first by filling in the form below.
Leave a Comment