Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

Voter ID trial wraps up

Still the only voter ID anyone should need

I didn’t follow the day to day reports from the voter ID preclearance trial, mostly because there wasn’t anything in the testimony that was truly unexpected. Lots of numbers, some of questionable provenance, were presented. The state continued to claim that nobody would be prevented from voting, not even the people who don’t have drivers licenses and would have to drive 120 miles to the nearest DPS office to get a state ID; this prompted one of the judges to note that federal court rules discourage the issuance of subpoenas when it requires a person to travel in excess of 100 miles to appear in court. Reporting on the closing arguments indicated that the three judges on the panel were skeptical of the state’s case, but as we saw with the Affordable Care Act one cannot always guess the ruling by the courtroom demeanor. Trail Blazers, Texas on the Potomac, the Trib, and TPM have the coverage; Texas Redistricting has a few extra links if that’s not enough for you. At this point all we can do is wait, but I’ll predict that we get a ruling on this case before we get one on redistricting. Finally, on a side note, since the state frequently referenced the Indiana voter ID law that was upheld by the Supreme Court, read this story (via Kos) about a challenge to Pennsylvania’s voter ID law that also attacks the foundation of the SCOTUS ruling in the Indiana case, and in doing so greatly undermines Texas’ claims about no one being disenfranchised by voter ID. PDiddie has more.

Related Posts:

Comments are closed.