It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Supreme Court says states can demand photo ID for voting

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Supreme Court says states can demand photo ID for voting


news.yahoo.com

States can require voters to produce photo identification, the Supreme Court ruled Monday, upholding a Republican-inspired law that Democrats say will keep some poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots.

Twenty-five states require some form of ID, and the court's 6-3 decision rejecting a challenge to Indiana's strict voter ID law could encourage others to adopt their own measures. Oklahoma legislators said the decision should help them get a version approved.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
Black Box Voting
Voter Fraud
Beyond Voting Machines: HAVA and Real Election Reform

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Top court upholds photo ID voting law
High court upholds Indiana's voter ID law
SCOTUS: AZ Voters Must Show ID To Vote November 7th
Mainstream media collude in upcoming election fraud?



mod edit: edited title to match the source article.

[edit on 29-4-2008 by Duzey]

[edit on 4/29/2008 by biggie smalls]




posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 05:26 PM
link   
Another law to "keep a brother down." This is a law targeting the poor, elderly, and people with criminal records to keep them from voting.

There is certainly a conspiracy here. I know there were already 2 threads open on this subject, but neither received any response and neither covered the conspiracy side of the issue.

This is a deliberate intent to stop certain groups from voting in the general election. We are seeing government suppression of votes.

The poor/minorities receive the worst education, worst jobs, and the worst voting machines.

We are seeing an attack on our "democratic" system of government from within. The disenfranchisement of large groups of people is disgusting and highly illegal.

Not only will we be required to show our IDs for voting, we'll soon need DNA to prove we are that person.

We are seeing the death of our democracy before our very eyes and there doesn't seem to be much we can do about it.

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 06:08 PM
link   
I fail to see what the big deal is
Why no concern about fraud? Are you simply willing to assume that everybody showing up at the polls is who they say they are? I have no problems with this what so ever. And the traditional cries of disenfranchised voters that the Democrats make all the time rings hollow since they themselves did the same thing to Florida and Michigan



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 06:17 PM
link   
I'm sorry, I just don't see any conspiracy here.
Why is it a problem to show picture ID?The ID shows a face,name and address to confirm you are who you say you are.
I've been asked to show picture ID for using a credit card, let alone voting.
If people are too poor to afford a driver's license,isn't there another form of ID that can be purchased for a low fee,or perhaps subsidized/free?



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Is the government giving photo IDs away? If that's the case then, no sweat.



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 06:33 PM
link   
I don't see the conspiracy here either. Every American citizen should have at least one form of photo ID, be it their drivers license or a state ID card. In Indiana state IDs are given out for free.

How do these so-called disenfranchised folks manage to register to vote, draw any type of government benefits, or drive without having some form of identification?

The only disenfranchised populations I can see this effecting are illegal immigrants, felons who are not allowed to vote, and fugitives that are living under assumed names. These individuals have no legal right to vote in the first place, so who cares?

[edit on 4/29/08 by LLoyd45]



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Nice to see the high court can rule from reason and common sense.



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 07:33 PM
link   
If you have to show ID at Blockbuster, I don't know why you wouldn't/shouldn't have to at the polls. How is this shocking?
I guess we like voter fraud?



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 07:39 PM
link   
No picture ID pretty much makes you a nonperson nowdays. Thats what I believe anyway. Not in a bad or good way just a nonperson. If you want to live as a non person why would you give a rats rear who is in charge of anything. Your life is living day to day not 4 years at a time.

mikell



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 07:44 PM
link   
Yeah this is pretty much a non-issue. If voter fraud weren't a problem then I would express some concern. But in this case the SC got it right.



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 07:49 PM
link   
I only support this If they plan to issue FREE ID's, Licenses are a different matter.
Some of you are approaching this from the wrong angle, Yes this does make sense to prevent fraud, etc etc etc, However one doesn't BUY their rights, If these ID's are going to be required to be used for voting purposes then they must be FREE, Or else the State is forcing its populace to to pay a TAX to vote...

Thats not freedom, thats BS.

When approaching these types of things all angles must be looked at and weighed carefully not only do they effect more then we would initially think, they also set precedents for further usurpations.

The whole (some stores make me show id this isn't any different) Yes it is different, Shopping at that store that is privately owned and abiding by there requirements is optional, You can go elsewhere.


Voting is also an option, but it's also a right, Rights are Free of charge.


So I have no problem with the idea, So long as those ID's are given Free of charge to those who provide the ID's issuer, ie; the DMV, their voter registration card.


The voter fraud excuse is much like terrorism and every other scapegoat, They trigger an emotional reaction, with little or no real critical thought as to the potential consequences of the law being passed.

[edit on 29-4-2008 by C0le]



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 07:54 PM
link   
I agree with all the others you should need a photo ID to vote Im sick of hearing dead people and dogs voting...hell lets throw illegals in there too.



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 08:12 PM
link   
I happen to be in Indiana, so I'm pretty familiar with this. John Paul Stevens is one of the more liberal justices and he wrote the majority opinion. This particular case was specifically about Indiana's requirement which according to the Yahoo news source-


Indiana provides IDs free of charge to people without driver's licenses. It also allows voters who lack photo ID's 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.


So there's no discrimination. The law was upheld. Everyone has all the opportunity they need to be able to vote. If proving who you are is an onerous burden, then I'm sorry that's just too bad.

If this is what it takes to lessen the voter fraud, then it's a small price to pay.

[Edit to fix quote box]

[edit on 4/29/2008 by yeahright]



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 09:06 PM
link   
You have to show ID to purchase tobacco and alcohol, etc etc etc.

With all the concern over the reliabilty of voting machines, why NOT the concern over those actually casting the votes
Lets face it its not that big of a deal to get an ID and this is legislation that should be passed in EVERY state.

Also, as yeahright points out this was not a Scalia and Thomas opinion either with JPS siding with the majority.



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 09:33 PM
link   
This should have been required long ago. Bravo to the court for making a correct decision. How in the world could you disagree? "Come-on" this is only fair to all. If you cannot afford to get photo I.D. You need to get a job.



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 


I agree,
I think this would do more to stamp out rampant vote rigging.
If you are who your ID says you are, more people that wernt allowed to vote in 2000 will be, specifically because in 2000 their naems were 'similar' enough to warrant confusion with X-cons.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Wow where do I start?


Originally posted by FredT
Why no concern about fraud? I have no problems with this what so ever.


Where did I say I'm not concerned with fraud? I've been the target of credit card fraud in the past.


Are you simply willing to assume that everybody showing up at the polls is who they say they are?


Nope, I'm not that naive. I'm also not naive about the poor being disenfranchised and a large number of them not having IDs. When you don't have a bank account, there's no reason to own an ID card. Homeless people don't have IDs, neither do they pay taxes, but they are American citizens.

Should they not have a right to vote?


And the traditional cries of disenfranchised voters that the Democrats make all the time rings hollow since they themselves did the same thing to Florida and Michigan


Whoa, whoa, whoa. You're talking about 2 states where Diebold machines were rigged to switch votes from a Democratic candidate to President Bush.

I'd call that voter fraud.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by citizen truth
Why is it a problem to show picture ID?The ID shows a face,name and address to confirm you are who you say you are.
I've been asked to show picture ID for using a credit card, let alone voting.


Yeah you need an ID to open a bank account, but that's not an inherent right to all those above the age of 18.

If you're old enough to vote, you should be voting. Its not that we really have a choice anymore, but since its a right to everyone (white, property-owning males) EVERYONE should have the opportunity.

Requiring an ID to vote is going to scare some people away from the polls, as well as create a bigger rift between voters.

What's next, logging of votes? Are we going to have to sign waivers so that our information can be stored in a federal database?


If people are too poor to afford a driver's license,isn't there another form of ID that can be purchased for a low fee,or perhaps subsidized/free?



Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas agreed with the outcome Monday, but wrote separately in favor of a broader defense of voter ID laws.


Historically "conservative" Justices aka neo-conservative.


"The universally applicable requirements of Indiana's voter-identification law are eminently reasonable. The burden of acquiring, possessing and showing a free photo identification is simply not severe, because it does not 'even represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting,'" Scalia said.


And there's nothing in place to ensure free IDs. I had to pay almost $100 for my driver's license. That's $100 most poor people can't afford to fork out.


Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter dissented.

Indiana's voter ID law "threatens to impose nontrivial burdens on the voting rights of tens of thousands of the state's citizens," Souter said.

The targets of the law, he said, are "voters who are poor and old."


Agreed.



What about people with expired IDs? They won't be allowed to vote because they're not "valid" people.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


No they are not giving IDs away. It is a huge sweat my friend.


reply to post by LLoyd45
 


Why should everyone have an ID? Why should any of us carry an ID in the first place? Sounds like a huge invasion of privacy.


How do these so-called disenfranchised folks manage to register to vote, draw any type of government benefits, or drive without having some form of identification?


You can register to vote with a SS card. You do not need a driver's license.


The only disenfranchised populations I can see this effecting are illegal immigrants, felons who are not allowed to vote, and fugitives that are living under assumed names.


Felons are American citizens and should therefore have the right to vote.

How many people on death row inmates are innocent?

Between 1994-1997, 17 innocent men were set free across the nation. I do not have an up to date number, but that is death row alone.

How about the federal inmate population? And how about on the state level?


These individuals have no legal right to vote in the first place, so who cares?


There are "illegal" immigrants fighting in Iraq/Afghanistan attempting to gain citizenship, but they are not allowed to vote because they're not yet citizens.

Would you ban our soldier's right to vote?



Originally posted by _Del_
If you have to show ID at Blockbuster, I don't know why you wouldn't/shouldn't have to at the polls. How is this shocking?
I guess we like voter fraud?


I've never had to show an ID at Blockbuster. How is this relevant to voting?

Yeah, I'm a huge fan of voter fraud. How about the fact that people can vote in multiple states in one election?

As I'm technically a resident of 4 states, I might as well vote in all of those states.

[edit on 4/30/2008 by biggie smalls]



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by C0le
If these ID's are going to be required to be used for voting purposes then they must be FREE, Or else the State is forcing its populace to to pay a TAX to vote.


Indiana does in fact offer free IDs:


If you do not possess an ID that is acceptable for voting purposes, Public Law 109-2005 requires the BMV to issue an Indiana State ID Card free.


Indiana State Government

Is it free elsewhere? Definitely not.


The voter fraud excuse is much like terrorism and every other scapegoat, They trigger an emotional reaction, with little or no real critical thought as to the potential consequences of the law being passed.


Sounds a lot like the Patriot Act 1&2 as well as the Homegrown Terrorism Act. All 3 were passed due to sensationalism and with little to no debate.

Politicians don't want to look pro-terror now do they?



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join