Last train, y’all.
Still the only voter ID anyone should need
Texas plaintiffs on Wednesday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to block the state’s voter photo ID law in November’s election.
“The facts of this case, including record evidence, show that significantly more voter confusion will result from granting the stay (and thus enforcing Texas’s Senate Bill 14) than would result from reinstating the injunction (and thus going forward under the prior law),” they wrote. “Therefore, a proper application of this Court’s precedents calls for vacating the stay.”
[…]
In their brief to the Supreme Court, the plaintiffs in the case — including the League of United Latin American Citizens — argue that it would be more disruptive to conduct the election with the ID law in place than to do without it, and would disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of Texas voters. They argue that the district court’s finding that the law discriminates against minorities outweighs the argument that the election is too close for a change.
See here for the background, and see here for a copy of the appeals brief. I certainly think one can make a cogent case that not implementing voter ID would be at most minimally disruptive, and would have the bonus of not putting a law that has been ruled unconstitutional by two federal courts and discriminatory by one into effect. SCOTUS has been a bit hard to read lately, so who knows what they’ll do. The one thing I am sure of is that with early voting set to start in 11 days, they’ll rule quickly, possibly today. Stay tuned.