Thursday, July 31, 2014
I woke up this morning to learn that Wisconsin's Supreme Court had upheld voter ID in the two cases it had jurisdiction over. (The statute is separately blocked in federal court.)
It's now 1:33 pm and I've finished a first read of the opinions.
From my perspective, the majority (5-2 in one case, 4-3 in the other) is wrong and weak in its analysis.
It is only right in the sense that Wisconsin law is whatever they say it is. There is no federal question here to appeal further; the federal cases will continue on their own track.
The dissents have the better of the arguments, although there are flaws in each of the opinions.
But the most interesting part of the case is that the majority, in the NAACP case (not the LWV one)
finds that a fee for a birth certificate would be a severe burden, and the statute would not withstand a severe burden analysis, and therefor the authorities in charge of issuing IDs are strongly urged to make birth certificates free for those who ask.
This suggests that voter ID in Indiana and elsewhere would be unconstitutional under those standards.
It's now 1:33 pm and I've finished a first read of the opinions.
From my perspective, the majority (5-2 in one case, 4-3 in the other) is wrong and weak in its analysis.
It is only right in the sense that Wisconsin law is whatever they say it is. There is no federal question here to appeal further; the federal cases will continue on their own track.
The dissents have the better of the arguments, although there are flaws in each of the opinions.
But the most interesting part of the case is that the majority, in the NAACP case (not the LWV one)
finds that a fee for a birth certificate would be a severe burden, and the statute would not withstand a severe burden analysis, and therefor the authorities in charge of issuing IDs are strongly urged to make birth certificates free for those who ask.
This suggests that voter ID in Indiana and elsewhere would be unconstitutional under those standards.
Comments:
Post a Comment
