Well, I have never met Mr. Randle/Randall. But my guess, as far and away the simplest explanation for what’s going on, is that he’s spent his entire life as a presumably productive member of society believing that his name is one thing, spelled one way, because that’s what his parents told him, and that’s what showed up on every document he’s ever seen, every piece of paperwork he’s ever filled out, etc, etc, etc. If there was fault, it was very likely either with his parents (who as I said may have been semi-literate at best) or with whoever filled out whatever form got turned into a birth certificate in the first place.
Describing this situation as just some guy randomly wanting to change his name without going through a legal name change is just nonsensical.
I’m sure there will be a case at some point where some person born “Fred Smith” really really wants to be known as “Sparkle Unicorn Happiness”, and wants to register to vote under that name, and in a situation like that, reasonable people can disagree as to what should happen.
But a 76-year-old who has (again, assuming my guess is correct) spent his entire life using a name that turns out to be different, but obviously not deceptively different, from what was printed on his birth certificate, and quite possibly never seen by any human eye since then, is in no way at all comparable.
But to a certain extent, you’re moving the goalposts here. We were discussing the level of burden this law would create. And here’s a case where a significant burden is created, but it doesn’t count, because it’s his own fault that that burden is there.
I’ve no idea why you’re asking me this question — Brickhead is the one who focuses on legalistics. Have I discussed Constitutional authority anywhere in the thread (discounting any parenthetical comments intended only to ridicule Brickhead)? Nor do I even understand the question. Are you asking if I wish I were some dictator or magician or assassin who could eliminate Justices or rulings of which I disapprove?
It doesn’t count because it’s the kind of outlier set of circumstances that society is prepared to accept. You might discover a fifteen year old who is mature, intelligent, and capable of understanding short- and long-term consequences, but we do not tear down the legal structures that prohibit her from signing enforceable contracts. We do allow her to petition the court for a legal emancipation, however.
In like manner, we don’t tear down a perfectly acceptable ID structure because a guy never realized how his name was spelled. We allow him to file a name change with the court to fix it.
Gosh, John, it sure seems to me that I am leapt upon by a metaphorical pack of rabid jackals when I say something that fails a logic test.
It’s funny that my postings are required to be a model of logical probity, and if not earn criticism and spawn (non-literal) foaming mouths from my interlocutors.
It’s almost as though observers such as yourself are saying, “Well, yes, we know septimus is sub-normal, so we expect little from him, but you, Bricker, have no such disability.”
Indeed, even if you were a citizen, your “vote,” on the issue is not exercised directly, but via the election of leaders who share your view. In a democratic republic, see, that’s how it works.
Oh, well, I concede without reservation your compete authority over your hypothetical. All people in your hypothetical world can vote eight times each for Democrats.
In that case, the tally is 8 disenfranchised citizens to 3 blocked fraud attempts. The policy is inferred as a failure, as is Bricker (morally, ethically and intellectually) for supporting it.
In your hypothetical world, it’s a failure. No shock there, because as you stridently reminded me, you control your own hypothetical – so the fate of the policy in your fantasy world was never in real doubt.
Now having won against your own creation, you are welcome to continue to glory in your glorious victory. Perhaps you can occasionally return from your break with reality to ponder the real world, in which Voter ID laws him happily along in full force and effect.
Oh, your country has always had my sympathy for occasionally succumbing to its self-destructive impulses. I do my part by reminding sane Americans that sanity still exists elsewhere, which I hope gives them hope.
I kind of fantasized that this was my job here, but since you’ve been here more than 15 years longer than me, you’re obviously going to continue to be in charge of this initiative, curse you. Just think of me as a kind of loyal canine sidekick, always willing to lend a helping paw, or at least enthusiastically wagging its tail when you post.