I was actually able to change a couple of minds by pointing out that the reason in person voter fraud is so rare is because the risk to reward ratio is very high. The closest margin for any federal race has been over 600 votes for a long time, so it’s insane to believe that one person could vote in person enough times to even dream of changing the outcome. Funny hats and fake mustaches won’t get them in the door more than a few times, and then they would have to know the names and addresses of a ton of other registered voters and know they weren’t going to vote.
You have to read the whole opinion to believe it. The General Assembly asked for and received a racial breakdown of who used which kind of ID, who voted early, who voted absentee, and who utilized same day registration. In EVERY CASE it limited those practices and types of IDs that were used disproportionately by African Americans. It exempted absentee voting from restrictions applied to in person voting, even though absentee voting was the only practice for which the state had any evidence of fraud. Do you want to guess which ethnic group was more likely to utilize absentee voting? This bill was rushed through beginning a few days after the Shelby decision, you know, the one where Roberts and his buddies piously declared that racial discrimination was mostly a thing of the past in deciding to repeal parts of the Voting Rights Act. Even so, what the legislature did is so brazen it’s hard to believe.
To the living members of the Supreme Court, (and one dead one)
Your majority decision to gut voter discrimination laws has proven to be wrong! And it didn’t take that long either. You were and continue to be out of step with the reality.
Show us you have a brain, and convene to reverse your decision or else your legacy in history (tied to your individual name) will show how utterly tone deaf you are to the real world.
Part 2;
How embarrassing this must be to the right wing of the Supreme Court. It only took a North Carolina knucklehead state legislature to prove that consent decrees on voting rights are still necessary in 2016 to provide protection against voter discrimination. How embarrassing this must be.
Part 3 upon further review
If you think about it, it would be incorrect to say that Scotus was “outsmarted” by a group of local state representatives. Truth be told, Scotus was “out dumbed” by the state reps. How shameful is that?
Can’t tell you how many times “dead voters” has come up as an excuse for voter ID on some of the idiot forums. Of course, that’s probably what you were snarking on.
McCrory also blamed “political correctness.” But I understand there is no room for that when he spends all of his time pushing for cultural and religious correctness.
I wouldn’t bet money on John Roberts issuing the stay. He knows that until the 9th Justice is appointed an overturn has little chance. Anyway this isn’t the voting rights case he wants to look at after gutting the voting rights act.
This decision may well be a product of electing President Obama. The Fourth Circuit was one of the most reactionary in the federal system. Thanks to appointments since 2008, it has become one of the more liberal. The three judges on the panel in this case were appointed, one by Clinton, two by Obama.
I want to cry. This is truly hug as it now – if I understand the Voting Rights Act – returns North Carolina to pre-clearance from the DOJ before enacting voter restrictions.
This is a perfect illustration of why it is so important that we retake the Senate. GOP has gerrymandered themselves so tightly in control of a majority of states as to make it almost impossible to oust them. Hillary must be able to load the courts with Judges who will stop this overt racism.
UPDATE: I stand corrected. The Court ruled out the remedy of returning NC to preclearance. Still a big win! And preclearance remains a remedy in the future.
No way the Supreme Court issues an order allowing the law to remain in effect until after the election because of the 4-4 split. The only Hail Mary for North Carolina (if its Democratic AG who also is the Democratic candidate for Governor actually appeals) would be to ask the Fourth Circuit as a whole to reconsider the remedy order.
What I mean by that is: only two of the three judges in the otherwise unanimous opinion voted to completely block the law. The third judge (the author of most of the opinion) voted to only enjoin the Voter ID provision, and otherwise send the issue of the proper remedy back to the district court judge (who upheld the whole law). It is a REMOTE possibility that the whole Fourth Circuit would agree that, in the first instance, the district court judge should hold hearings on the proper remedy. But the Fourth Circuit has 10 Democrat-nominated judges, and only 5 Republican-nominated judges, so it is really unlikely that it would disturb the remedy.
No right of appeal. This is a voting rights case, not a redistricting case (though we have one of those cooking too). The Court will hear on cert if it hears it at all. It rejected a cert petition on the 4th Circuit’s earlier preliminary injunction, though not before temporarily dissolving the injunction before the last primaries, when it had five Republican votes. Now it has four.
I am not a fan of Roberts. As cynical as I am, I think he must look at Trump with a bit of disdain. He needs to know the the SCOTUS would be paralyzed with suits starting day 1 of a Trump Presidency.
