So the obvious thing is for those without valid photo id’s to get them.
Surely George Soros or some other benefactor could put some funds towards this kind of effort?
Get the ID = GOTV.
Are any of these cases going to be appealed to the SCOTUS?
A number of years ago, I needed to get a duplicate birth certificate. It cost something like $60. For many people, that is a LOT of money. Yet a birth certificate is needed for many forms of photo ID: first-time drivers license, passport, etc.
They already ruled that voter ID laws are constitutional.
Well, let’s hope that the people who need IDs can get them – not like in some states where they close down DMV offices to prevent people from getting IDs.
It is a hidden Poll Tax…
And they are. There is nothing inherently unconstitutional about the idea of a voter ID law. It’s the manner in which they are created and the procedures and obstacles that they are used to deliberately create that are the problem. If anyone can walk into the DMV and say “gimme my voter ID” and they have to snap your picture and give you a free ID with little to no obstacle, then I wouldn’t have any problem with it whatsoever. It’s when these fuckers make lists of what’s an acceptable ID and then research which IDs minorities are likely to have so they can be crossed off the list…or when they close down every DMV in minority-majority counties, etc., that there’s a serious problem. Frankly, this article’s description of the OK law makes it sound surprisingly tame and bland, which surprises me from the most racist state in the nation.
The ruling states. “Neither the Legislature, nor the People of the State
of Oklahoma, have to wait for a problem to directly arise before they
take action to address it.”
So if we can assume that Republican judges elected or appointed in Oklahoma are likely to attempt to suppress legitimate voters from voting, under the court’s logic, are they not then guilty of civil rights violations regarding the right of citizens to vote?
And would not the same apply to Republican legislators who author and/or pass these measures, that is that we can presume they intend to suppress legal votes.
This ruling would seem to open a huge can of worms!
“(t)he Voter ID Act was intended as a procedural regulation to prevent future in-person voter fraud,” the ruling states.
[emphasis mine]
One of the many crazy things about this voter ID scam is that it completely misses mail-in ballots, which by their nature are far more susceptible to actual fraud, as opposed to the Brownback-style fiction that is driving these laws.
Why not turn it into a feature? From “Get Out The Vote” to “Get The Vote In The Mail”.
The real problem with the court’s “logic” is that they’ve essentially ruled that “rational relation” has nothing to do with “exists in reality.”
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/rational_basis
In other words, but in not so many words, the court has basically determined that a statute or legislation can be deemed “rational” even if there is absolutely no evidence that the problem it is intended to address actually exists or is even likely to exist in reality. According to them, so long as you have successfully fabricated a bogeyman and demagogued it enough to create the political will for the legislature to pass legislation fixing that imaginary problem before it ever exists and despite its unlikelihood of ever manifesting, then that’s sufficient.
It is the ANTITHESIS of “rational.”
It also allows a voter to present an ID card issued by the county election board, or to cast a provisional ballot that would be counted after the person’s identity is confirmed following an election.
And this is the key exception, to my mind. Of course, who is going to be “confirming” the person’s identity is the real question. Just more GOP cheating, naturally.
Yes. I’d like to see states controlled by Democrats introduce extra ID requirements for anyone holding a gun license because there may be evidence, at some point in the future, that this class of person is more likely than any other to commit voter fraud.
BTW folks you really need to see this, breaking. Basically Avenatti has discovered that Cohen and Essential Consulting have been the conduit for huge bribes for Trump.
Some of the people of Oklahoma are racist, true, but there are also many of them are capable of the most astonishing acts of kindness and compassion as well.
I suspect you’re kidding (at least I hope so), but every voter ID law I’m aware of is facially neutral (i.e., it doesn’t single out classes of people who need ID and others who don’t). They’re not neutral in practice, of course, but the courts have turned blind eyes to that sort of thing for decades.
I do not know what to make of this. If true, Mueller has Cohen in prison for quite some time, I would think.
How would Avenatti get hold of this information? That is not specified.