• Court Strikes Down North Carolina Voter ID Law
    28 replies, posted
[quote=Politico]A federal appeals court has struck down North Carolina’s voter identification law, holding that it was “passed with racially discriminatory intent.”The ruling also invalidated limits the same state law placed in 2013 on early voting, same-day registration, out-of-precinct voting, and preregistration. The ruling also invalidated limits the same state law placed in 2013 on early voting, same-day registration, out-of-precinct voting, and preregistration. The three judges assigned to the case — all Democratic appointees — were unanimous that the Republican-controlled North Carolina legislature violated the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act three years ago by enacting the measure requiring voters to show certain types of photo ID at the polls. [...] The 4th Circuit ruling also delivered a harsh rebuke to U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Schroeder, who issued a mammoth, 485-page decision in April upholding the law. Motz suggested Schroeder had ample evidence of racial bias in front of him, but failed to put the pieces together. "The district court clearly erred" when it found a lack of discriminatory intent and when it deemed North Carolina's interests in passing the law to be compelling, she wrote. "This error resulted from the court’s consideration of each piece of evidence in a vacuum, rather than engaging in the totality of the circumstances analysis required....Any individual piece of evidence can seem innocuous when viewed alone, but gains an entirely different meaning when considered in context."[/quote] source: [URL]http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/court-strikes-down-north-carolina-voter-id-law-226438[/URL] And some interesting sections from the text of the ruling (which you can find [URL="http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/161468.P.pdf"]here[/URL]): [t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CojBhajWEAA_UUQ.jpg[/t] [t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CojQe2lXgAE-f9Y.jpg[/t]
I [I]still[/I] don't understand how voter ID laws are discriminatory. Any legal citizen can go get an ID. I've been argued at about this before but none of the arguments I've heard have really made any sense. The DMV doesn't have a sign that says "IDS NOT ISSUED TO AFRICAN AMERICANS."
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50796540]I [I]still[/I] don't understand how voter ID laws are discriminatory. Any legal citizen can go get an ID. I've been argued at about this before but none of the arguments I've heard have really made any sense.[/QUOTE] Its a problem that's stupid from all view points, but in the end the only reason they exist is to disenfranchise voters so I won't support them.
[QUOTE=Saxon;50796562]Its a problem that's stupid from all view points, but in the end the only reason they exist is to disenfranchise voters so I won't support them.[/QUOTE] [I]but how[/I] It addresses the risk of electoral fraud by making it impossible to cast a vote that isn't associated with a valid ID, which is something I'd expect Sanders supporters to be very much behind.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50796565][I]but how[/I] It addresses the risk of electoral fraud by making it impossible to cast a vote that isn't associated with a valid ID, which is something I'd expect Sanders supporters to be very much behind.[/QUOTE] Sanders won't support it because its poll taxes in a different form Fraud hasn't been an issue so far with most cases being felons realizing they can't vote, I doubt an ID is going to stop someone from influencing an election the way most people propose.
Regardless of the merits in ID, the law was largely struck out because it restricted voting accessibility in regard to early voting. Poorer communities have more trouble finding time to vote on actual election days, and rely on early voting more. As the decision reads, it was evident that the restrictions on early voting were specifically targeting such communities.
Excuse me while I go file some court cases against anything and everything that requires an ID! Because it's not like almost every federal program requires you to show State ID, SSN, and other forms of ID! Hell, why don't we go after the ATF for having NCIS background checks, because those cost $30 to $60 in some places, and that effectively limits the rights of Americans to own firearms based on wealth. I will never understand how IDs are seen as an issue in the way of voting, but things like the electoral college and closed state elections are not. Seriously, what the fuck. [editline]29th July 2016[/editline] [quote]The three judges assigned to the case — [B]all Democratic appointees[/B] — were unanimous that the Republican-controlled North Carolina legislature violated the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act three years ago by enacting the measure requiring voters to show certain types of photo ID at the polls. [/quote] Haha, because it's perfectly fine when Democrats fix court cases.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50796565][I]but how[/I] It addresses the risk of electoral fraud by making it impossible to cast a vote that isn't associated with a valid ID, which is something I'd expect Sanders supporters to be very much behind.[/QUOTE] In-person voter fraud is a problem that almost does not exist. The problems with voter fraud are ballot box stuffing, and more recently computer fraud, neither of which voter ID does anything to stop. There has never been any significant number of people going to a polling station and voting fraudulently, and when they do, it's one of the easiest crimes on the planet to catch. The Republicans have even straight up admitted that voter ID is a strategy to stop Democrats from voting. All it does is add one more barrier to stop people from voting. If someone is not super committed to voting for a candidate already, then making them have to go to a DMV on one of the few days they're open, which in some counties of some states is only a handful of days in the entire year, and wait 3 hours in line to get an ID, even though most poor people work well over 40 hours a week, and don't have much free time to go to the DMV, is a pretty perfect way to get people to not vote. And considering that the only other thing you need an ID for is driving, and most black people don't drive because they live in the city, they would have to get an ID specifically to vote, which in a country where most people are already not too keen on voting in the first place, pretty much guarantees that black people won't vote. And boy are these laws effective at stopping people from voting.
The government sucks at getting people IDs, and the process is far worse if you lose your documents and you're poor. I support voter ID laws myself but everything surrounding the issue screams incompetance. Also to everyone saying that you voter ID fraud is not a major issue or that voter ID can't catch voter fraud, could you share some sources/references for everyone in the thread? I am interested to know the statistics and past cases.
the partisanship in state courts is sort of rediculous sometimes "we do not see any instance of disenfranchisement here" -first court "we completely and totally see disenfranchisment here" -second court [editline]29th July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=RIPBILLYMAYS;50796925]The government sucks at getting people IDs, and the process is far worse if you lose your documents and you're poor. I support voter ID laws myself but everything surrounding the issue screams incompetance. Also to everyone saying that you voter ID fraud is not a major issue or that voter ID can't catch voter fraud, could you share some sources/references for everyone in the thread? I am interested to know the statistics and past cases.[/QUOTE] 31 credible cases in the billions of ballots cast in the last 10 years, however this washington post story is an interesting take on the matter [url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/08/06/a-comprehensive-investigation-of-voter-impersonation-finds-31-credible-incidents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/[/url] while voter fraud probably happens more than the actual count says, the types of fraud cant and arent fixed by ID laws
[QUOTE=RIPBILLYMAYS;50796925]The government sucks at getting people IDs, and the process is far worse if you lose your documents and you're poor. I support voter ID laws myself but everything surrounding the issue screams incompetance. Also to everyone saying that you voter ID fraud is not a major issue or that voter ID can't catch voter fraud, could you share some sources/references for everyone in the thread? I am interested to know the statistics and past cases.[/QUOTE] [URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/08/06/a-comprehensive-investigation-of-voter-impersonation-finds-31-credible-incidents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/[/URL] From 2004-2014 there were a grand total of 31 potentially fraudulent votes cast, out of over 1 billion. Not 31,000 (0.0031%), not 3,100 (0.00031%), 31 (0.0000031%). Almost every case of presumed voter fraud that Republicans keep bringing up turn out to be clerical errors, people with the same name who are assumed to actually be a dead person voting, mistaken SSN attributions, etc. In-person voter fraud is the dumbest crime imaginable, every single ballot goes through rigorous checking to make sure it's not fraudulent, and if you want to risk it anyways you have to show up in person and talk to the people who will be testifying against you in court. If you try to commit in-person voter fraud, you're an idiot. Not only will you never make a difference by faking one single vote at a time, you'll almost certainly get caught. In order to actually affect the results with in-person voter fraud you'd need a conspiracy of thousands of people voting over and over again in order to make a difference. A conspiracy that large would be uncovered immediately. The voter fraud that's concerning is people hacking computer polling stations, or stuffing ballot boxes. Systematic corruption cannot be stopped by Voter ID laws, they're just a strategy.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;50796882]Excuse me while I go file some court cases against anything and everything that requires an ID! Because it's not like almost every federal program requires you to show State ID, SSN, and other forms of ID! Hell, why don't we go after the ATF for having NCIS background checks, because those cost $30 to $60 in some places, and that effectively limits the rights of Americans to own firearms based on wealth. I will never understand how IDs are seen as an issue in the way of voting, but things like the electoral college and closed state elections are not. Seriously, what the fuck. [editline]29th July 2016[/editline] Haha, because it's perfectly fine when Democrats fix court cases.[/QUOTE] so besides ignoring this: [QUOTE=l337k1ll4;50796898]In-person voter fraud is a problem that almost does not exist. The problems with voter fraud are ballot box stuffing, and more recently computer fraud, neither of which voter ID does anything to stop. There has never been any significant number of people going to a polling station and voting fraudulently, and when they do, it's one of the easiest crimes on the planet to catch. The Republicans have even straight up admitted that voter ID is a strategy to stop Democrats from voting. All it does is add one more barrier to stop people from voting. If someone is not super committed to voting for a candidate already, then making them have to go to a DMV on one of the few days they're open, which in some counties of some states is only a handful of days in the entire year, and wait 3 hours in line to get an ID, even though most poor people work well over 40 hours a week, and don't have much free time to go to the DMV, is a pretty perfect way to get people to not vote. And considering that the only other thing you need an ID for is driving, and most black people don't drive because they live in the city, they would have to get an ID specifically to vote, which in a country where most people are already not too keen on voting in the first place, pretty much guarantees that black people won't vote. And boy are these laws effective at stopping people from voting.[/QUOTE] and ignoring this: [QUOTE=bitches;50796623]Regardless of the merits in ID, the law was largely struck out because it restricted voting accessibility in regard to early voting. Poorer communities have more trouble finding time to vote on actual election days, and rely on early voting more. As the decision reads, it was evident that the restrictions on early voting were specifically targeting such communities.[/QUOTE] you also state that democrat-appointed [B]judges[/B] are incapable of making decisions without them not being based on law are facts so scary that you can't respond to them?
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50796540]I [I]still[/I] don't understand how voter ID laws are discriminatory.[/QUOTE] You should read the arguments from the three justices and maybe gain some insight. The "requiring ID" element was only part of it, most of it had to do with early voting and preregistration that were totally unnecessary [QUOTE=Grenadiac;50796565][I]but how[/I] It addresses the risk of electoral fraud by making it impossible to cast a vote that isn't associated with a valid ID, which is something I'd expect Sanders supporters to be very much behind.[/QUOTE] It disenfranchises exponentially more people than the highest numbers of in-person voting fraud we have. Why the hell would Sanders supporters be behind this?
[QUOTE=Raidyr;50797035]It disenfranchises exponentially more people than the highest numbers of in-person voting fraud we have. Why the hell would Sanders supporters be behind this?[/QUOTE] Vote rigging was a big concern for Sanders supporters. If every ballot had to be associated with a valid ID, it'd be very difficult to rig votes.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50797103]Vote rigging was a big concern for Sanders supporters. If every ballot had to be associated with a valid ID, it'd be very difficult to rig votes.[/QUOTE] The problem with voter fraud with Sanders was: A. Valid votes being "lost" by the polling stations, which is systematic corruption, and not stopped by voter ID B. A party-wide nominee election system that allows the party to effectively ignore the will of the people, not stopped by voter ID And last but the opposite of least, C. In some states, namely New York, literally the exact laws you're saying Sanders voters should support prevented valid voters from going to the polls and voting because their paperwork was suddenly considered invalid and they weren't told until election day. Obviously not prevented by voter ID considering the actual problem literally IS voter ID. And in reference to "If every ballot had to be associated with a valid ID, it'd be very difficult to rig votes." I go back to my previous statement: In order to actually rig a vote with in-person voter fraud, you would need hundreds or thousands of people voting dozens of times in order to have enough votes to make a difference. Even if one person did cast a vote fraudulently, it sure as hell wouldn't affect the vote in any way whatsoever. It already is difficult (read: impossible) to rig votes with in-person voter fraud, all vote rigging is from systematic corruption, and completely disconnected from any effect voter ID laws could ever conceivably have.
[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;50797127]The problem with voter fraud with Sanders was: A. Valid votes being "lost" by the polling stations, which is systematic corruption, and not stopped by voter ID B. A party-wide nominee election system that allows the party to effectively ignore the will of the people, not stopped by voter ID And last but the opposite of least, C. In some states, namely New York, literally the exact laws you're saying Sanders voters should support prevented valid voters from going to the polls and voting because their paperwork was suddenly considered invalid and they weren't told until election day. Obviously not prevented by voter ID considering the actual problem literally IS voter ID. And in reference to "If every ballot had to be associated with a valid ID, it'd be very difficult to rig votes." I go back to my previous statement: In order to actually rig a vote with in-person voter fraud, you would need hundreds or thousands of people voting dozens of times in order to have enough votes to make a difference. Even if one person did cast a vote fraudulently, it sure as hell wouldn't affect the vote in any way whatsoever. It already is difficult (read: impossible) to rig votes with in-person voter fraud, all vote rigging is from systematic corruption, and completely disconnected from any effect voter ID laws could ever conceivably have.[/QUOTE] As it is, a voter station can just count votes that don't exist. If each vote has to be associated with a valid ID, that's not possible, right? I don't know. I'm just discussing based on my understanding of the issue, I'm not out to get anyone or stating anything as fact. I don't really get how voter ID laws are disenfranchising but there is obviously an issue there that I'm just not identifying with for some reason.
For those of you that don't know why it's considered discriminatory I'll offer a little explanation. It all starts back with the Jim Crow laws, things like poll tax and intelligence tests before you could vote. The whole idea behind those laws was to literally prevent the poor and minorities from voting. Flash forward to today and the whole voter ID thing is seen under the same light, with the reason being that it costs money to get an ID. I know most people are going to go "is just X bucks, pony up and who cares", but that's the problem. At that point you now have to pay to exercise a right, something you should not have to do no matter how small the expense. I'd have no problem with voter ID laws if the ID's were free and the state accommodated those with transportation difficulties, but that's not going to happen in most states.
Voters IDs are just another means to stop people you don't want voting, voting. To hell with any of the undemocratic politicians who cape for this nonsense
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;50797231] I'd have no problem with voter ID laws if the ID's were free and the state accommodated those with transportation difficulties, but that's not going to happen in most states.[/QUOTE] But in this state it was a non issue. [url=https://www.ncdot.gov/dmv/driver/id/]There is no fee charged for a North Carolina ID Card for an individual registered to vote in North Carolina who does not have acceptable photo identification under N.C. General Statute 163-166.13.[/url]
As a North Carolinian I'm glad it's gone, was an idiotic law passed by our dipshit general assembly and asshat governor. I can't wait until they are gone and may their political careers burn in hell
I disagree with voter ID laws on basis of discrimination, but hypothetically if everyone had a valid ID, couldn't it be used to better capture votes? Like if at the polling station your ID was recorded, your vote would almost certainly not be lost or "lost".
[QUOTE=Keelwar;50801289]I disagree with voter ID laws on basis of discrimination, but hypothetically if everyone had a valid ID, couldn't it be used to better capture votes? Like if at the polling station your ID was recorded, your vote would almost certainly not be lost or "lost".[/QUOTE] Are you suggesting that who people vote for would somehow be tied in with their voter ID? That is a very, very dark road to go down. That's throwing out every bit of progress made since the 'secret ballot' was invented. Keeping in mind that it was implemented because of things like voter intimidation when someone was able to discover how someone else voted.
On one hand, the voter ID law here seemed quite fair. Almost any reasonable form of ID is accepted, it seemed to me that you'd almost have to legally not exist if you didn't have one of the accepted forms of ID. The NC government has also put a large amount of time into notifying the public that the voter ID law exists and which types of ID are considered valid. On the other hand, the law seeks to combat a problem that is either exceedingly rare or not actually a problem at all, and does so by adding an extra layer of red tape around what should be a very basic process. It seems antithetical to the principles behind the civil rights legislation hard fought for 50 years ago.
Discriminatory or not it doesn't make sense to make people jump through additional hoops to vote if the fraud problem is virtually non-existent to begin with.
[QUOTE=anthonywolfe;50801068]But in this state it was a non issue. [url=https://www.ncdot.gov/dmv/driver/id/]There is no fee charged for a North Carolina ID Card for an individual registered to vote in North Carolina who does not have acceptable photo identification under N.C. General Statute 163-166.13.[/url][/QUOTE] It may be free to get the ID, but it's probably not similarly free to get the necessary identifying documents to get a state ID or driver's license. In many states, fees to get copies of Birth Certificates and the like can be anywhere from $20 to $200. In my state, West Virginia, I believe it's $35 to get a copy sent from the capital, and that's only if you already have other supporting ID to prove you're the one on the certificate. If you don't have [I]that[/I] supporting documentation, you may have to actually go down, in person, to the capital to get everything you need to be able to get the ID to vote. Personally, I'm glad my state doesn't have any voter ID laws yet. Also, just for comparison, the unconstitutional poll tax was worth roughly $20 in today's prices. Some of the hoops you'd have to jump through now can easily cost you 10x that.
I don't know specifically about NC, but some states with voter ID laws close down the DMV for most of the day when an election comes around in specific areas. Usually ones that don't vote republican
[QUOTE=Thy Reaper;50801584]It may be free to get the ID, but it's probably not similarly free to get the necessary identifying documents to get a state ID or driver's license. In many states, fees to get copies of Birth Certificates and the like can be anywhere from $20 to $200. In my state, West Virginia, I believe it's $35 to get a copy sent from the capital, and that's only if you already have other supporting ID to prove you're the one on the certificate. If you don't have [I]that[/I] supporting documentation, you may have to actually go down, in person, to the capital to get everything you need to be able to get the ID to vote. Personally, I'm glad my state doesn't have any voter ID laws yet. Also, just for comparison, the unconstitutional poll tax was worth roughly $20 in today's prices. Some of the hoops you'd have to jump through now can easily cost you 10x that.[/QUOTE] Here in NC you can just go to the courthouse in the town you where born in to get the info or have it shipped and it's [URL="http://vitalrecords.nc.gov/fees.htm"]$24[/URL] to search for and get a copy of a Birth Certificate, $15 to put a rush on it. Though you really shouldn't lose the one you got at birth... Plus it is possible to acquire a VoterID using 2 of these documents Birth Certificate, Payroll record, W2 Tax form, Medicaid or Medicare card, Social Security Card. If you somehow don't have any 2 of these documents at any given time I think you might have bigger problems then not being able to vote.
If Republicans could simultaneously prove voter fraud was an issue as well as guarantee free, convenient replacements to all citizens [B]and [/B]were not against early voting/voting on Sundays then I could see more support for voter ID laws. Given that both are impossible and that Republicans have in the past admitted that voter ID laws are in place purely to get Republicans elected, I don't see either happening. [QUOTE=anthonywolfe;50801725]Here in NC you can just go to the courthouse in the town you where born in to get the info or have it shipped and it's [URL="http://vitalrecords.nc.gov/fees.htm"]$24[/URL] to search for and get a copy of a Birth Certificate, $15 to put a rush on it. Though you really shouldn't lose the one you got at birth...[/QUOTE] Familiar with the expression "Shit happens"? Important documents get lost, it has nothing to do with whether they "should" be lost. [QUOTE=anthonywolfe;50801725]Plus it is possible to acquire a VoterID using 2 of these documents Birth Certificate, Payroll record, W2 Tax form, Medicaid or Medicare card, Social Security Card. If you somehow don't have any 2 of these documents at any given time I think you might have bigger problems then not being able to vote.[/QUOTE] Hardly. You can lose your birth certificate or SS card as easily as any other document. If you don't work then you won't have a payroll record or W2. If you aren't covered by medicaid/medicare then you won't have those either. Not working and not being under 65 shouldn't disqualify someone from voting, regardless of the "bigger problems" you feel they may not have. [editline]30th July 2016[/editline] Even to that point though, if someone is on Medicaid than a pretty big fucking problem for them would be not being able to vote for Clinton and instead dealing with Trump repealing the ACA and federal funding to states that accepted it.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;50801764]If Republicans could simultaneously prove voter fraud was an issue as well as guarantee free, convenient replacements to all citizens [B]and [/B]were not against early voting/voting on Sundays then I could see more support for voter ID laws. Given that both are impossible and that Republicans have in the past admitted that voter ID laws are in place purely to get Republicans elected, I don't see either happening. [/QUOTE] Voter fraud may not be a huge issue but any steps towards modernizing the system should be appreciated and all this does is make the democrats feel better because it wasn't their legislation passed, just like the republicans are trying to do with the ACA, Instead of fighting between parties over who can be the worst how about we work towards improving conditions in the country? [QUOTE=Raidyr;50801764] Familiar with the expression "Shit happens"? Important documents get lost, it has nothing to do with whether they "should" be lost. Hardly. You can lose your birth certificate or SS card as easily as any other document. If you don't work then you won't have a payroll record or W2. If you aren't covered by medicaid/medicare then you won't have those either. Not working and not being under 65 shouldn't disqualify someone from voting, regardless of the "bigger problems" you feel they may not have. [editline]30th July 2016[/editline] Even to that point though, if someone is on Medicaid than a pretty big fucking problem for them would be not being able to vote for Clinton and instead dealing with Trump repealing the ACA and federal funding to states that accepted it.[/QUOTE] Shit does happen but if you lose your SSN or Birth Certificate you need to get them replaced otherwise you're gonna run into more issues then not being able to vote because to do anything more then to just exist you need them.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.