Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | T | Trial

A severe setback to voting rights.

Article Excerpt
In May, the state of Indiana held a presidential primary that attracted nation-wide attention when a group of elderly nuns--some in their 80s and 90s--were turned away at the polls because they did not have the right type of photo identification. Just a week earlier, the Supreme Court had upheld the Indiana statute that imposed this requirement. (1)

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The Court's ruling could clear the way for a wave of restrictive voting laws. It holds that such laws are constitutional even if they keep tens of thousands of eligible voters--especially those in certain groups that tend to vote Democratic--from casting their ballots.

The law will likely inspire other states to adopt similar, or even more prohibitive, statutes: While Indiana's voter law requires drivers' licenses and passports, Missouri is considering one that would require proof of citizenship.

More generally, the decision is important because six justices, although without a majority opinion, rejected strict scrutiny in evaluating restrictions on voting. The Court flatly said that it does not matter if voting restrictions are motivated by partisan politics or by one political party's attempts to squelch another's votes.

The Indiana law requires citizens who vote in person on election day, or at the circuit court clerk's office before election day, to show photo identification as a condition for voting. (2) The requirement does not apply to mail-in...

View this article FREE - Now for a Limited Time, try Goliath Business News
Free for 3 Days!