Intro: "In a blow to voting rights advocates, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson upheld the state's restrictive voter ID law, which could disenfranchise as many as 750,000 citizens in the state."
Voter ID laws in Pennsylvania threaten to disenfranchise many voters. (photo: Colorlines)
Judge Upholds Pennsylvania Voter ID Law; Opponents to Appeal
16 August 12
n a blow to voting rights advocates, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson upheld the state's restrictive voter ID law, which could disenfranchise as many as 750,000 citizens in the state.
Though voter ID proponents were unable to cite even a single case of voter impersonation that would justify the ID requirement, Simpson "didn't rule on the full merits of the case," instead limiting his scope to whether it was a proper exercise of the legislature's authority, according to the AP. They continue:
The original rationale in Pennsylvania's Republican-controlled Legislature for the law - to prevent election fraud - played little role in the case before Simpson since the state's lawyers acknowledged that they are "not aware of any incidents of in person voter fraud." Instead, they insisted that lawmakers properly exercised their latitude to make election-related laws when they chose to require voters to show widely available forms of photo identification.
Voting rights advocates plan to appeal the case to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which will likely issue its own ruling before the November election. There is currently an even 3-3 split between Democrats and Republicans on the Court; the 7th Justice, Republican Joan Orie Melvin, is under suspension because of an unrelated corruption scandal.
Since Simpson ruled to uphold the law, Democrats will need one crossover vote to win a majority and strike down the law. Chief Justice Ronald Castille, a moderate Republican from Philadelphia, is most likely to side with the Democrats.
The federal Justice Department is also looking into whether Pennsylvania's voter ID complies with federal law.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |













Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
We obviously ran into a conservative with the usual blinders on to the true condition of the poor. He could have just as logically said "due to how money is so required for our current culture, requiring people to pay to vote isn't an onerous demand" in a rationalization for a formal poll-tax.
The ability of the well-off to be totally ignorant about poverty is a big part of the problem. It reminds me of the New Orleans evacuation plans in case of a hurricane: "everyone get in their cars and drive inland to higher ground". Um, and the poor who DON'T HAVE CARS, we just sort of forget about them, huh?
The ability of the well-off to be totally ignorant about poverty is a big part of the problem. It reminds me of the New Orleans evacuation plans in case of a hurricane: "everyone get in their cars and drive inland to higher ground". Um, and the poor who DON'T HAVE CARS, we just sort of forget about them, huh?
Given the facts of the case there is no other reason that is logical.
I certainly hope that none of the appeals judges has any dirty laundry with which they can be blackmailed to send the case back to the lower court...
Tm7devils, I believe there is more 'dirty money' behind this rather than blackmail or dirty laundry. Judge "Simpleton" Simpson's smirk in the still photo on the evening news was a dead giveaway. I am certain that the filthy lucre trail leads right to the Koch Bastards or "Commie Karl Rove" and one of their pet superpacs, "UNAMERICAN CROSSROADS." GET OUT THE VOTE!!!! OBAMA 2012!!!!
RSS feed for comments to this post