General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSometimes, the SCOTUS is worse than useless
The decision is a setback for civil rights groups that contend the law could disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of residents who lack proper ID particularly racial minorities, seniors, students and people with disabilities.
And it turns both sides' sights on Texas, where a similar statute is pending before a federal appeals court. Eventually, the justices are considered likely to resolve the festering issue.
New election laws in both states, along with Ohio and North Carolina, forced the high court to settle last-minute disputes before the 2014 elections. The justices generally tried not to change procedures just as voters were set to go to the polls, but they did not rule on the broader issue: what types of state restrictions are constitutional.
[link:http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/23/supreme-court-voter-id-wisconsin/25108917/|
LINK TO USA TODAY ARTICLE]
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)much less the fact that it was a 6-3 decision with one of the more liberal judges on the Court agreeing with the ruling.
NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)WE are so completely fucked over in this country, we are allowing laws that are not constitutional then arguing about how bad those laws can get, not that they are not to be allowed in the first place
spanone
(135,855 posts)Wounded Bear
(58,676 posts)a few years back were screaming about the evils of ID cards, like when the Clintons were talking about a national medical care card?
Funny how they get to be so hypocritical.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)benld74
(9,908 posts)one was given the nickname of 'useless'. However SCOTUS has beaten that this time BY A LONG SHOT.
Gothmog
(145,433 posts)I know one of the attorneys representing the good guys in the Texas voter id case which is scheduled for oral arguments on April 28. The attorneys representing Texas plaintiffs did not want the ACLU to seek cert. in the Wisconsin case. The Texas case is a stronger case. The DOJ is a party in the Texas case and there are express findings of fact as to intentional discrimination in the Texas case.
Here are Prof. Hasen's observations http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71186
Had the Court agreed to hear the Wisconsin case, it is possible it would have read Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act even more narrowly in cases of vote denial, as well as make bad law on the scope of the equal protection clause. In this way, the Courts refusal to hear Wisconsins voter id case may be a blessing in disguise. As Ive long argued, the best way for liberals to cut their losses is to stay out of the Supreme Court when possible. Things could have been worse if the Court took Wisconsin than if they didnt. And if you trust Justice Ginsburg, trust her her in not voting to grant cert in this case.
I think that the Texas case is the stronger case and would be a better case to reach SCOTUS