Texas, Ignore The Court And Do What You Want
by Big Dog on Jul 20, 2016 at 17:44 2016 Election, Political
Texas has had a strict voter ID requirement since 2011 and the Obama administration challenged it in court. Today the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the law violates the Voting Rights Act and instructed a lower court to make changes to fix the discriminatory effect of the law with as little impact on this year’s election as possible.
The Constitution describes voting in several amendments and they state Congress can write laws to carry out the things described in those amendments. Those amendments talk about when a right to vote can be denied or abridged. This is not the case with regard to ID laws. No one is denying or abridging the right to vote. A person must simply provide ID to do so.
As liberal courts are eager to state with regard to the Second Amendment, reasonable restrictions can be applied to it and to all rights. That is why courts have allowed restrictions to be applied to the Second Amendment (most of which are actually unconstitutional). So if reasonable restrictions can be applied (most people would not argue that a background check for a non-private firearm sale is unreasonable) then it is not out of the question to require ID to vote. It is a REASONABLE restriction.
[note]Evidently, the law is discriminatory because it has a short list of IDs that are acceptable. The list looks about the same as the list required to prove citizenship when applying for a job. Does this mean the requirement to show ID (and prove citizenship) when applying for a job is discriminatory?[/note]
There is nothing discriminatory about asking for ID before allowing someone to vote, period. It matters not what any court or President says about it, asking for an ID is not discriminatory at all.
The unions Obama loves so much require IDs before anyone can vote in union elections. One must show an ID to get on a plane and that is not deemed discriminatory.
Neither is showing ID to buy alcohol or tobacco, registering kids for school or sports programs and it is definitely not deemed discriminatory to show ID to get into a government building.
None of these acts requiring ID would be deemed discriminatory based on the types of ID deemed acceptable…
Texas should probably tell the court thanks but we will do things our way. This is our law and this is what we are going to do. If you want to vote here then you need to follow the law, period.
In other words, Texas should tell them to stick it because ID laws are reasonable and the list of acceptable IDs is not prohibitive.
As an aside, please don’t blast me with the idea that poor people can’t get an ID (even from the short list). Practically everyone needs an ID for some aspect of life and the poor seem to be able to get an ID to get welfare…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: court, fraud, law, texas, voter id
Yes- it seems that IDs are relative to the circumstance in which they are being required- welfare? Got my ID- Being stopped for a criminal act? I got no ID- If it benefits me, I got ID- If it is a legal matter, no gottee.