Just curious if this makes anyone who supported this decision think again. I think having the judge who wrote it say they weren’t imaginative enough to think of the ways it could be used is a big deal for how we should think about decisions like this.
ETA: The decision: “Posner authored the 2-1 opinion in Crawford v. Marion County”
I think it’s too late. Read almost any comment stream on a story about political and voting issues; the content of the posts confirm that it is now an ingrained “fact” that voter fraud is rampant and has to be controlled. (And is the only reason any Dem/liberal/centrist ever gets elected, and is the cause of all our problems, and…)
The blithe acceptance of this Huge (not Big) Lie is just breathtaking… ly frightening.
Well, did he use any of those arguments? The “political science” argument of protecting the integrity of the voter rolls is not, in and of itself, offensive to democratic equality. What is offensive is the purposes it has been used for.
All of my objections to voter id laws could have been easily put to rest by a sincere and well funded effort, an outreach, to put such photo id in the hands of every citizen with a minimum of fuss and bother. Still not all that crazy about it, but if it will soothe the troubled minds of my fellow citizens and cannot be warped to some malign purpose, go for it.
As to Posner, read some of his stuff, and he strikes me as a pretty rigorous thinker. Conservative in the old school way, sensible, reasonable, and amenable to fact. Miss 'em.
You, I, and some others have said this from the beginning. It doesn’t surprise me that the proponents of these laws make no effort toward that outreach effort, as it would not serve their partisan purpose. It does though somewhat surprise, and sadden, me that such an effort has not been forthcoming from “our side” (such as it may be). “We” seem to have instead gone with the righteous indignation approach, apparently hoping that those people [del]disenfranchised[/del] inconvenienced out of voting will just get pissed enough to overcome the barriers. Frankly I’m not too sanguine with this. Seems to me a real outreach would be the Progressives’ best ever registration-and-Get-Out-The-Vote scenario.
The discovery of how many people lack any type of formal ID should be a wake-up call to many, especially on the progressive side. These people not only are being impacted on voting - but many other functions that impact living in a modern society.
The complete lack of “WHAT? That many people don’t have a bank account, a driver’s license, etc.?” reaction along with a plan to rectify is sad.
I agree - the Democratic party could OWN a lot of votes by making it easy for these people.
The “problem” being that, if they don’t feel themselves to be impacted enough to get a state ID card already, they aren’t likely to do whatever they need to do to vote either. Witness ACORN forging forms because they couldn’t find enough poor people who cared enough to fill out the paperwork.
Liberals are quick to dismiss the notion that voter fraud is widespread, but the issue of people who are desperate to vote but cannot because the Evil GOP has foiled their efforts to get on the grid is equally overstated, I suspect.
Well, it’s kind of tough to do that, given the lengths conservatives will go to sabotage any such out reach effort. Witness the libelous attacks on ACORN that led to the organization being shut down completely.
“Witness” is quite the word here, in the sense of testifying on faith in the absence of any such fact. ACORN workers in certain circumstances ripped off ACORN because they were too lazy to perform the work, not that no one wanted them to.
The Republican slander machine murdered ACORN because ACORN was small but effective, they were slowly, slowly tilting the registered voter population against the
Pubbies preferred proportion.
Doesn’t change my mind. Anyone who thinks that the intent of voter ID is to prevent fraudulent voting is either lying or misinformed. The intent is to keep undesireables from voting. You can make getting that state ID easier, but that only makes it somewhat less offensive.
No. Who cares what Posner thinks? The Seventh Circuit decision was appealed regardless; the Supreme Court decided the issue. And Posner’s decision was a matter of law, which the Court reviews de novo anyway.
In other words, Posner’s decision did not sway the ultimate result.