Pennsylvania Judge Declares Voter ID Law Illegal

Post Reply New Topic

I didn't say the entire right is evil - though there are individuals within it's ranks that fit that description. And no the right isn't all powerful - because the left will always be there to counter them.

There's no evil on the left???
And about the only thing the left counters is progress.

I'd like to debate further but it's past bed time here in Happy Valley.

Where did you get that from?
And going to bed? You don't have MLK day off?

There does exist such a list of all registered voters, however the problem arises due to people moving or dying. Republicans have tried in several states to have these lists verified and updated and democrats have blocked these moves. Why? The answer is simple. Deceased voters overwhelmingly vote democratic.

We traded several one day holidays (MLK Day, Columbus Day, Presidents Day, Veterans Day, etc.) for more time off at Christmas. Our last day is Dec. 23 and we don't go back until Jan. 3. That, and we still get Memorial Day, 4th of July, Labor Day, and two days off for Thanks Giving. We can do that since we're contractor employees but I don't think our fed counterparts are even allowed to swap like that.

Probably they aren't.

This is absolutely so.

There is only one right that is absolute: the right to freedom of thought, belief and opinion (to use the Canadian formulation of that right). This is the only right that cannot be curtailed by the operation of law. Every other right is subject to limits, and the extent to which those limits are permitted gives an insight into the relative strength that those rights carry.

Now, when courts are deciding whether those limits are reasonable or not, there are a number of factors that come into consideration, and included in that consideration is the nature of the right being infringed and the gravity of that infringement.

The right to vote is fundamental to a Parliamentary democracy or a republic, ranking right up there with free expression and a free press. This right goes directly to the legitimacy of the institutions that create and protect all of the other rights that flow from that sovereignty.

Denying someone the right to vote is a total extinguishment of that right. Contrast that with prohibiting a person from yelling, "Fire!" in a crowded theatre. That restriction does not fundamentally alter the freedom that the person has, otherwise, to public expression, and the prohibition sits squarely within a government interest in protecting the public peace.

But taking away someone's vote is complete. There's nothing left. That should only be permitted where there is a compelling public interest to be served. If the government cannot demonstrate such a compelling interest, then the standard of protection of the right infringed is going to be significantly higher.

Happy Valley?That sounds like an institute for the very nervous.If you don't go to bed are the men in white coats going to give you a few good shocks and some Thorazine?

Sounds like the voice of experience.....

^^^^ I've never hid being in the nut hut.Sorry,no Thorazine.Never had shock but was so depressed once I would have tried it.It was an interesting experience,some good ,some bad.

Bad day for the Republican party. They fail once again at keeping people from voting.

No, not really. Drivers licenses and property ownership records are about all they have to go on. And a drivers license or property ownership doesn't prove citizenship. And if a citizen doesn't have a drivers license, or own property, or have other government licenses, then the government has no record of them at all.

Any government registry has always been considered an invasion of privacy in American culture. Which is kind of a joke anyway. Since we have a government that openly spies on US citizens, from listening in on private telephone conversations to reading emails. But those little things give Americans the illusion that they have privacy.

The judge is an idiot and should be removed from the bench.

Why?

Yes. The only thing that the ID law affects is the Presidential election, which Obama won because of the large support in the urban areas, which vote overwhelmingly Democrat anyway, so there is no evidence voter fraud would have affected any election in the state. Republicans have an easier time getting into office elsewhere because Obama only won the areas which have a major city in them, and most of the people in the urban areas don't vote in any other election (I think Philadelphia had a single digit voting % in the last midterm). Making the ID's and other measures would be too burdensome cost-wise on the state to combat something that has no significant effect on any election.

You need a photo ID for:
Buying alcohol
Buying tobacco
Buying guns
Driving a car
People like this judge and Eric Holder need to be removed from their positions.

Last edited by AntDog on 25 Jan 2014, 2:27 am, edited 2 times in total.