PA Judge: Photo ID Law ‘Reasonable,’ ‘Non-Discriminatory';
Because
of the unsecured elections in Nevada, Oregon, Minnesota, and New
Hampshire, the electoral votes in those states would have been won by
Romney, but will instead be stolen by the Barack Hussein Obama Regime.Voter ID laws which secure the vote in states that have chosen to enact them, thus protecting the voting franchise for their citizens, will result in Romney picking up all of the swing states with a Romney polling rating of -7 or better on Karl Roves' map, thus enabling Romney to win Colorado, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, South Carolina, and Florida. Romney should win by enough in Iowa, Wyoming, Nebraska, North Carolina, and West Virgina to overcome Obama Regime election fraud, but Nevada, Oregon, Minnesota, and New Hampshire will fall to the Obama Regime's election fraud.
Here's the story from CNS News and The Wall Street Journal:
--------
Pa. Judge: Photo ID Law ‘Reasonable,’ ‘Non-Discriminatory'
By Matt Cover | August 15, 2012(CNSNews.com) – A Pennsylvania judge refused to block a state law requiring that voters present identification to vote, declaring that the law was “reasonable” and “non-discriminatory” and adding that the law’s liberal challengers were unlikely to prevail in the case.
“[T]he photo ID requirement of Act 18 is reasonable, non-discriminatory, non-severe burden when viewed in the broader context of widespread use of photo ID in daily life,” Judge Robert Simpson wrote in Wednesday’s decision.
Opponents of the law had asked Simpson to block its implementation before the November elections, arguing that requiring people to obtain photo IDs would effectively deny them their right to vote.
Simpson openly scoffed at this argument, saying that sitting for a free photograph was not a severe burden on anyone’s right to vote.
“[T]he inconvenience of going to PennDOT [Pennsylvania Department of Transportation], gathering required documents, and posing for a photograph does not qualify as a substantial burden on the vast supermajority of registered voters,” he said.
The ruling comes after a July 25 hearing where opponents of the law presented a string of witnesses who claimed they would be disenfranchised because they did not have photo ID. Simpson acknowledged that opponents “did an excellent job of ‘putting a face’ to those burdened by the voter ID requirement” but ultimately said that their case was unlikely to succeed.
“I am not convinced any of the individual Petitioners [opponents of the law] or other witnesses will not have their votes counted in the general election,” he said.
At issue is a new Pennsylvania law that requires photo ID for in-person voting and some kind of official proof of identification for absentee voting. Opponents charged that hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvanians lacked such identification and would thus be denied the right to vote.
Simpson did not decide the merits of the case, merely ruling that he would not stop the law from being implemented. However, he leaned heavily on Supreme Court precedent in saying that opponents’ constitutional arguments did not pass muster.
Citing the Supreme Court’s upholding of a similar law in Indiana in 2008, Simpson noted that voter ID laws had been ruled constitutional before, saying that it appeared there would be little reason to rule the Pennsylvania statute unconstitutional.
“I reach the same conclusions the United States Supreme Court reached,” Simpson said. “The Commonwealth’s asserted interest in protecting public confidence in elections is a relevant and legitimate state interest sufficiently weighty to justify the burden [of producing ID].”
--------
Judge Allows Voter-ID Law To Proceed
By Kris Maher | Updated August 15, 2012, 7:22 p.m. ETA Pennsylvania judge declined Wednesday to block the state's voter-identification law from taking effect, saying opponents would likely fail to show the law violates the state's constitution.
Opponents of the Republican-backed measure, which requires Pennsylvania's 8.2 million registered voters to present a state-approved photo ID, such as a driver's license, at the polls, said they planned to file an appeal Thursday to the state Supreme Court. Legal experts said it is unclear if an appeal would be ruled on before the November election.
Democrats in the state have said they believe the law, known as Act 18, would disproportionately impact poor urban voters and others more likely to vote for President Barack Obama and other Democrats. State Republicans say the law is intended to prevent voter fraud.
Several groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the League of Women Voters, which sought a preliminary injunction, said the law violates the state constitution guaranteeing the right to vote and may affect over a million voters, keeping many of them from the polls.
Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson rejected claims the law would disenfranchise some people. "The statute simply gives poll workers another tool to verify that the person voting is who they claim to be," Judge Simpson wrote in his decision.
Voting
disputes have cropped up elsewhere. On Wednesday, lawyers for Mr.
Obama's campaign asked a federal judge in Columbus, Ohio, to allow all
early voters to cast ballots until the day before the election. Under a
law signed by Republican Gov. John Kasich, members of the military can
cast ballots until the day before the election, while early voting ends
four days earlier for other residents.The Pennsylvania law is one of several measures enacted across the country over the past two years as GOP lawmakers seek to crack down on what they say is widespread voter fraud.
"Now that the court has upheld the constitutionality of the law, we can continue to focus our attention on ensuring that every Pennsylvania citizen who wants to vote has the identification necessary," said Republican Gov. Tom Corbett.
State officials say free voter-ID cards will be available from Aug. 27 for residents attesting they can't get documentation, such as a birth certificate, needed for other state-issued ID.
No comments:
Post a Comment