Supreme Court upholds voter ID law

Posted: Monday, April 28, 2008 10:20 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: Courts

From NBC's Pete Williams
In one of the most closely watched cases of the term, the US Supreme Court has upheld Indiana's requirement that voters show government-issued photo IDs at the polls. At least 17 other states were awaiting this decision before going ahead with similar laws of their own.

The vote was 6-3, with Justice John Paul Stevens joining the mostly conservative majority.

Democrats had attacked the law, saying it created a burden for poor, minority, and handicapped voters, who would have a harder time getting government-issued IDs. They accused Indiana officials of passing the law to suppress the minority vote.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

What are other states doing?Texas claims all you have to do is sign in---We had to show picture ID in MI---course our votes still did not count.

NObama-MI (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:26 AM)

I'm not sure. I could go both ways on this one.

On one hand, it's really not that difficult to get an official ID (at least, not where I live).

On the other hand, I suppose that it could be burden to obtain an ID if you really don't need one except to vote.

An interesting debate. I'd be interested to see what others think.

http://thepajamapundit.com/

the Pajama Pundit (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:27 AM)

http://twocanpete.blogspot.com/
The demcorats and republicans had better get a clue. The American people are sick of illegal immigrants. The next time you get pulled over for speeding just explain that you are an 'undocumented' race car driver and see how that logic works out for you!

twocanpete (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:27 AM)

Republicans are going to say it's a no brainer to require govt issued ID as proof of who you are when you vote...but the reality is that this was a pretext for the real reason for the republican passed law - to suppress the democrat vote. Anyone else who says otherwise is disingenuous.

pat huntington ny (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:29 AM)

This is bad news for the Democrats. Nearly one third of their votes come from illegal voters.

Jersey Joe (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:30 AM)

Imagine that. Having to prove who you are before you can vote. Wonders never cease.

Cleo Todd Manhatten (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:32 AM)

The Democratic drive to sign up illegals to vote for them all seems to have gone for naught. Nice try Dr. Dean. Better luck next time.

Katie Morgan, Oceanside CA (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:33 AM)

Well, well, well, this is a blow! The young, the infirm, the elderly and the minorities of Indiana will suffer, will it hurt Barry or Hillary???
The poor OH MY GOD THE POOR!! How did this happen?
We truly live in a big brother Gestapo state.

HP Boston (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:33 AM)

Your conservative Court at work for you - as long as you are one of them. And what is the Court's suggestion for assuring that those who are entitled to have one of these cards can get one? And when will this law now be able to go into effect in Indiana, May 6?

Pete Caloger Bushkill, PA 18324 (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:34 AM)

Handicapped voters have picture ids so they can drive their Rascals. Why is it so hard for them to get a voter id card?

Emma, Greenville, SC (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:34 AM)

This law was passed to suppress the vote of those who find it difficult to get around, whether they are elderly or poor of any color. Under this law, people who lack a driver's license have to go to their County Court House to get a state issued identification. If you are 80+, without a car, living in rural Indiana and your family is not in state, how exactly do you get to the County Court House? I am appalled that this law was allowed-- we are neither required by our State governments, or our Federal Government to carry identification on our persons -- but now, our Supreme Court is allowing barriers to be enacted to voting that require such identification? I had hoped they would reach a different verdict which supports the right of all of us to vote and prohibits the State from erecting false barriers to our ability to cast our ballot.

There will be 2-4 Supreme Court justice vacancies during the next President's term. Let us elect a Democrat who will appoint Justices who respect the right to vote, rather than electing a Republican who will appoint more justices who appear to believe that voting is a privilege and not a right.

The ballot can be protected without such harsh measures. Indeed, voting lists exist that poll workers check to make certain each and every voter is registered to vote. Sometimes these lists are abused as well, but the voter can still vote provisionally and provisional ballots are eventually counted if the voter is indeed a citizen and registered to vote in that State. This is more than enough protection of our process. This "new" protection is nothing more than an attempt to disenfranchise many who are poor or elderly (without transport or near family).

Kim, Pasadena, CA (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:35 AM)

And isn't it just ironic that Indiana stood to go Blue this November? There go the Republicans again...changing the rules for their own gain.

Pat Huntington NY (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:36 AM)

What is a mystery is how 3 justices found reason to vote against this basic requirement. What is the alternative these justices agree with, anarchy?

Yo Mami (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:49 AM)

It has always bothered me that when I vote in San Diego County, I am never asked to prove my identity. IN theory, anyone could say they are me and vote in my name. The logic behind this law is flawless. There is no logic backing the opposition except the love of voter fraud.

William, Escondido, Ca (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:49 AM)

"They accused Indiana officials of passing the law to suppress the minority vote."

Of course they did, but it depends on which minority group you're talking about. The African American community will most likely benefit from this by not having illegal aliens weakening their vote.

Dave, Tn (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:50 AM)

Now, you'll really hear the whining. Proper i.d. should be a federal requirement. I'm thrilled my home state of Indiana stood up for honesty in elections and the Supreme Court validated it.

The claim that seniors, the poor and minorities are at a disadvantage is a bunch of b.s. The Democrat party, as usual, tries to pull something.

Dangling Chad, Mugwump, Florida (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:52 AM)

Democrats are steaming about this ruling. Signing up all those illegal aliens to the voting roles cost a lot of money.

Bren Michaels (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:52 AM)

Democrats are so stupid.

Friends of Bill (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:53 AM)

Stevens must have had a senior moment of him, and for once in his life ended up on the correct side of the issue.

Supo Marconi (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:55 AM)

Outragous! Stevens should have his vote suppressed.

Claky Wallace, San Francisco (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:56 AM)

In national elections, why isn't there a set national voter system? For every state to manipulate and dictate how it will conduct a national election has always been crazy to me. As someone with an ID, I don't have a problem with the law. But I can see how it can be manipulated to suppress turn out.

The funny thing to me is that Republicans always claim that this is a center right country, but they always go out of their way to restrict voting because they're scared that massive turnout will always work against them.

Go figure.

Mister Anderson (The Matrix) (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:57 AM)

Some people always try to use others as scapegoats to hide their devious intentions. The ID Law should scare Rush Limbaugh's rogue element from interferring with Obama's victory.

Carl, Kalamazoo, MI (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:59 AM)

Voter fraud. If you're a Democrat, you depend on it.

Elly Weiss (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:01 AM)

I am all for ensuring that the actual voter is the one voting and ID's is a good way to start, but I wonder would Obama or Clinton benefit more from this law?

Mark, VA (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:02 AM)

I guess I'm not sure why it's harder for minorites and the disabled to get government IDs. I can understand the poor might have trouble with the $10-or-so fee, but that is only required every few years, right? So what's the problem?

Steve, Springfield, Ill. (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:04 AM)

Oh how the government of the people does everything possible to quiet their voices. And this one is so timely.

bill, okla (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:05 AM)

What a load of crap, no one is supressing the minority or poor vote. Just uber-liberal paranoia. It's really not that hard to get government-issued ID -- how could it possible affect the poor??

You don't have to get a driver's license, there's just paperwork; I don't know about other states, but in Florida it's cake to get an ID card if you're legal. That's like saying it's unjust to make drug tests mandatory for a welfare check (which is a GREAT idea, write your representatives on that one).

We need to get this law rolling in ALL states that don't have it, especially the ones with illegal immigration at its worst. Illegal aliens already cost us hundreds of billions in welfare, education, health care, lost revenue to legitimate workers; they make Iraq look like it's MAKING money. The last thing we need is them choosing our nation's leaders.

Tom in Miami (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:06 AM)

I look forward to reading the Court's discussion of the distinction between poll taxes and photo ID fees, the Court's discussion of voter access to locations where photos and identity verification actually takes place if more distant than polling places, and the Court's discussion of state obligations to provide handicapped access to state services per ADA legislation.

Woman Voter, Chicago, Illinois (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:10 AM)

Could this Conservative Court have cut it any closer?
Nice swipe at many in the Dem. base and a still
active Dem. primary season.

Deborah Greenlawn, NY (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:11 AM)

In Florida we have to show our DL before we sign in to vote.. Hey heres a thought why not put photos on votor registration cards??? That way you are registered and identified at the same time. No need to bring 2 cards to vote.

Gail Barkley,Jupiter,Fl (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:16 AM)

Does IN have free state ID's; how is forcing people to purchase (they do cost money at least in PA) an ID not a quasi poll tax (which last i checked the 24th amendment explicitly forbids). IN is saying a citizen now MUST give the government money (tax) for an ID to vote, seems unconstitutional...but im sure the SCOTUS is not seeing it that way, and i'll have to read their reasoning. The 24th amendment was to allow voting to be as barrierless as possible, this seems a step backwards.

nick in PA (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:18 AM)

Tom in Miami

Great Post!!!

You are right. It is very easy to get an ID in FL (if you are a legal resident of the US).

I moved here from another state and I had my birth certificate to prove that I was a legal citizen.

In FL we have over 900,000 illegal aliens as reported by our politicians.

They should not be allowed to vote!!!

Independent Voter, FL (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:18 AM)

The "poor" and "others" seem to have no problem signing up for govt handouts yet, when a simple program is enacted to help prevent voter fraud,one of our most fundamental rights, the democrats scream "Rights violation". Give me a break!

Tony Naz, Des Plaines IL (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:18 AM)

hey, the poor make it to the welfare office... they can make it to the court house or dps. the elderly could present their medicare card. this should have always been a law..maybe we wouldn't have had some of the jerks in the white house.
A DEMOCRAT

PAT O BAYTOWN, TX. (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:19 AM)

Chuck, why aren't you talking about the Q&A with Wright?

Is it true MSNBC IS OBAMA HEADQUARTERS?

patty,sd,ca (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:20 AM)

All you bigots whining about illegal immigrants voting: how stupid can you be? If you were illegal, would you show up somewhere where you might be confronted with it and possibly detained? Do you think they are politically active and worry about who might enact more favorable laws? They're too busy working their a**es off and dodging La Migra to worry about it. Show me ANY case where this has happened? Any of you bigots out there with actual documented proof of the scary brown people conducting voting fraud? The fact of the matter is there is virtually zero instance of voter fraud, but many cases of disenfranchisement of legal voters, always tactics employed by the right-wingers. They know that if everyone gets motivated to vote, and votes in their own best interest, the Republican party is D.O.A.

Doug, San Diego (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:21 AM)

Mr. Wright, I choose not to consider him a man of the cloth, really showed his lack of decency and character. His rude and attacking responses to that poor unfortunate woman asking the questions showed his true character and meanness.

I can not believe the composure of the woman asking the questions. (Sorry I don't know her name). I believe he evaded the questions asked and I really belive now, he is a racist. Mr. Wright has attacked every white person that disagrees with him. What a showman, that wants to divide the country, not to unify. Is he deliberately wanting Obama to loose?

Diane Thomas (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:21 AM)

"Your conservative Court at work for you - as long as you are one of them."

Yeah, nothing says "conservative" like a lead opinion by JOHN STEVENS!! Another "conservative" vote came from Justice Kennedy... author of the majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas announcing a right to homosexual sodomy.

Phil (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:22 AM)

On this one, the Democrats are plain wrong, I think. Showing ID isn't too much of a burden.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:22 AM)

Elly Weiss (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:01 AM)

I guess the difference is that Democrats depend on individual voter fraud and the Republicans depend on Institutional voter fraud. The GOP probably would not have had to worry if their standards for Presidential candidates were a tad higher.

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:22 AM)

Great. The Republicans are going to cheat their way into the White House again. Not only are they pushing these voter ID laws that amount to a poll tax (gee, big surprise that the Bush / Regan Corporate Supreme Court presented to you by Cheveron upheld laws that would keep poor people away from the polls) the Republicans are also currently circulating petitions to get issues relating to abortion and gay marriage on the ballots to fire up their evangelical base (the big hypocritical "pro-life" base that is strongly in support of the death penalty and as many wars as Bush and McCain can declare...the big "support the Troops" hypocrites that don't support the G.I. bill...that base)

Fabulous. This is exactly the reason that - no matter which Democrat gets the nomination - we need to vote them in!!

Mkd (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:22 AM)

The law is two sided on one hand it can help to stop voter fraud. On the other hand it does opne up the dorr to stricter practices to proving your identity to vote. I am torn about how I feel. Personally I would like them to fix voter machines and spend more time and effor t in insuring that elections can not be bought or fixed.

Kris STL (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:22 AM)

GOOD ...... NOW THEIR GOES HALF OF barack obama VOTING BASE

Stewart, Bethesda, MD (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:26 AM)

this is a republic, not an unfettered one-man-one-vote democracy; it never has been. see the electoral college. see minority presidents.

the decision by the republican supreme court is many bad things, but it is not surprising.

we'll never get rid of the electoral college. the small states, which are over represented in the senate, will never allow it.

JP, milltown, nj (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:28 AM)

Does this mean that illegals can't vote now? Gee, we've counted on them to be part of the Democrat vote for the past elections and were hoping they would help us to a victory in '08.

DNC (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:29 AM)

Why now? They had 4 years to decide if they wanted an ID Check or not. Why now this close to the Indiana Primaries? Not only the Republcans stand to gain from this but Hillary as well. Hillary won Pennsylvania, but it wasnt enough to derail Obama, Obama stand a chance to win Indiana and it is said that he will win North Carolina. If he wins the next two it will be pretty much over, but if Hillary take one of them then it might be up for grabs. I feel this will place the poor, old and minorities at a disadvantage, those who are likely to vote for Obama, giving Hillary a advantage. The Republicans are not worried about Indiana right now, but Hillary certainly is. THINK PEOPLE THINK!

Wright. C (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:31 AM)

And isn't it just ironic that Indiana stood to go Blue this November? There go the Republicans again...changing the rules for their own gain.
Pat Huntington NY (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 10:36 AM)

Yes, how dare they take away the illegal vote!

jj (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:31 AM)

You know what? We have to show an id to do almost anything in this country...if these so called poor people don't have photo id how in the heck are they getting government aid or services then? Or doing almost anything? They can't be so disconnected from society and then show up to be informed voters...

Rick, NC (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:31 AM)

Tom in Miami
******************

It's cake to get an ID, if you are legal and IF you have the money to pay for it. At $4 for a gallon of gas and with food prices escalating - believe me this poll tax will have its intended impact. And that is exactly what this is - it is a backdoor way to impose a poll tax. In case you are not aware a poll tax is - poll taxes are illegal, they were used historically to suppress the black vote. Gee, I wonder why the Republicans are coming up with this now. Believe me, it's got nothing to do with voter fraud. Recall, the Republicans have gotten help from the Supreme Court before in "winning" an election - looks like they are more than willing to help out again.

Actually - there is a comprimise here - the states imposing these laws should waive the fee for the ID, and they should be required to send out notices to everyone on the rolls and make several public service announcements during prime time and during the morning news hours regarding the new law - I'd be fine with that.

Mel (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:32 AM)

I live in Indiana. Your Bureau of Motor Vehicles will give you a photo ID for free. (Look it up on www.in.gov!)

As for making it difficult for those in rural areas with travel difficulties -- They'll have to travel to vote, won't they? If they can't get out to get an ID, they can't get out to vote, either. If they can get help with one, they can get help with the other.

If they're voting with a mail-in absentee ballot, they're not required to show photo ID. So what's the problem?

Rich Schmidt, Valparaiso, Indiana (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 11:33 AM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=951374