Obama calls voter ID ruling 'wrong'

Posted: Monday, April 28, 2008 6:27 PM by Mark Murray

From NBC/NJ's Aswini Anburajan
INDIANAPOLIS, IN -- Obama said he was disappointed today in the new Supreme Court decision that has upheld Indiana's voter ID law, calling it "wrong," and emphasizing that the law could suppress turnout among minorities and poorer voters.

"I am disappointed by today's Supreme Court decision upholding Indiana's photo identification law -- one of the most restrictive in the nation," Obama said in a written statement.

He referenced his decision to file an amicus brief when Indiana's voter ID law was first challenged, saying he did it because he believed that "it places an unfair burden on Indiana residents who are poor, elderly, disabled, or members of minority groups."

Obama pledged to ensure that all voters have "unfettered access to the polls" on May 6th, and added that he was "encouraged that the Court has not complete closed the door to future challenges to state voter ID laws that create discriminatory barriers to the right to vote."

In a 6-3 decision today, the Supreme Court said that Indiana's requirement that voters show a form of identification at the polls is not unconstitutional. Opponents of the law argued that the law placed a burden on the right to vote and would depress turnout among poor, elderly, minority and disabled voters at the polls.

Clinton's Indiana state director, Robbie Mook, when asked about the law, avoided any comment on the decision, only saying: "Our top priority is that every vote will be cast and counted." He added that the campaign would act according to the law and was encouraging its supporters to vote absentee and vote early.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

Because it is documented that elderly people or poor people don't get updated ID's from their respective states. Some states have a process that after a certain age the ID doesn't expire, some states the ID expires in a few years. For elderly, disabled, and some poor voters it is a burden to have to go get updated ID's and pay for such identification. This is why said identification at polls is unjust, because if it is expired it is not a valid ID. The ruling today is unfortunate, however, as a first year law student and future lawyer, I hope to one day challenge the rule again in years to come.

Raymond, OK (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 7:22 PM)

Are these American citizens commenting? Are these Christians? What happened? Why are some so angry?

Pamela Los Angeles (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 7:23 PM)

I'm with Obama on this one. Since when hasn't a voter registration card been enough to prove ID??

Pamela, Missoula, MT (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 7:24 PM)

I wish Obama had the courage to say that this indeed is the right way to go. Him saying that it is "wrong" is just going to move voters out of his column. Any idiot can get a picture ID. To say otherwise is a lie.

David Doe, portland, or (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 7:27 PM)

Luanne, the only reason Hillary is even arguing for those votes to be counted is because she needs those votes..Indiana didn't break any rules, just incase you didn't know.
This doesn't only cut into Obama's voting base, it cuts into both his and Clinton's, seeing that Clinton does better with the elderly and the poor, and Obama does better with the minorities.
I think a valid voter's registration card is good enough, why would you need ID, unless it's easy to fake a voter's card. But this issue truley shows you who's an advocate of the ppl...

Free Thinker, Lawrenceville GA (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 7:28 PM)

This ruling should be precedent to abolishing mail-in ballots and go back to the old way of getting your capable butt into the booth

Patrick, Seattle, WA (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 7:28 PM)

I am from your state, and just livid at the way you call things antiblack, but you twist your words on things that are definately antiwhite, Jewish, etc.. to suit you. Hilary doesn't pull punches about race. We all know that you use the race card where it is convient for you. Thanks but, NO thanks!!! I will take my chances with Hilary, before I get hit with a "Well it's a black thing that no white person can possibly understand". Don't you think the whites of today are tired of paying for our forefathers mistakes. I mean, didn't you yourself say that you are NOT a muslim just because your father was???

Kris, Chicago (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 7:35 PM)

It discriminates against anyone who does not have an ID, which is unconstitutional in a general election. This is a primary so it doesn't restrict a person's right to choose the president. Personally I think it is an unfair requirement and serves no real purpose other then to make it harder for the less fortunate to vote. If this was the general election I promise you every democratic leader including Senator Clinton would fight this requirement for the above reason. Think critically folks, don't get led around blindly by EITHER side. And for those of you who resort to name calling to make a point... I hope you understand your childish attitude removes any credibility from your comments.

Wes Shell (Sent Monday, April 28, 2008 7:35 PM)

<< Previous

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=954290