Texas voter ID law struck down: Impact on U.S. election?

not the role of courts to weigh in on the efficacy of legislation

 

i don't see what the big deal is you have to have a ID to drive why not to vote.

 

Are you seriously going to add "impact on US elections" to every thread you start now?

 

In reference to the role of the courts, you really don't know what you're talking about do you?

 

It absolutely is; especially when measuring it against the purposeful denial of 15th amendment rights.

 

So requiring ID is denying constitutional rights? I'll remember this for other conversations when you'll be trying to say that requiring ID is merely regulation.

 

In answer to OP: no, no effect whatsoever.

 

Oh please do - Please, please do.

Maybe you should file an amicus brief for rehearing based on my post.

 

Maybe not this election, but it seems like the legal tide is turning against Voter ID laws - this is another big loss, from a pretty conservative circuit.

 

In the future, I agree. Just not in the fall elections, especially re: TX, our TX, all hail the mighty-red state.

 

Wasn't making a legal argument, just pointing out that you are an inconsistent joke when it comes to things like this. I'm sure most people knew that anyway.

 

'course, the court wasn't ruling on whether voting laws requiring IDs were constitutional or not... but instead ruled the Texas law was discriminatory and ordered the law to be sent back down to have changes that will effect remedy.

 

I suppose it might make the year in which Texas flips to blue incrementally sooner.

 

When every state flips to blue, we will no longer need elections. We will just have the DNC pick our 'elected' officials.

 

When the intent of said legislation is to deliberately circumvent the US Constitution and to foster discrimination against specific groups of citizens, then yes, the courts do have that right.

 

nowhere does it say legislation is to be reviewed for efficacy (or repealed on that basis). It's not a court's role to decree what is effective public policy.

if legislation is ineffective, elect different legislators, rather than imposing your will on the people

This is so dumb. Proving who you are (god forbid) may be an undue burden, but race is no barrier to doing so.

 

The intent of said law was to dilute the voting power of minority voters by requiring only certain types of IDs and not others (such as college student IDs). The IDs the Republicans allowed were deliberately picked because procuring them placed an unnecessary burden on citizens who were otherwise legally allowed to vote because it required them to undertake additional effort and expense to secure the "officially recognized" forms of ID. Republicans have used similar tactics in places like Waller County where students attending Prairie View A&M University were kept from voting in county elections because they were college students with home addresses not in the county. Abbot and Co. just expanded this tactic statewide once the Supreme Court struck down parts of the Voting Rights Act. In fact, all of the so-called "Voter ID" bills passed since then have been in states with Republican Governors or legislatures. Concidence? I think not...

 

the intent is for voters to prove who they are