SCOTUS Upholds IND VID Law
The Justices, in 6-3 decision, uphold the Indiana Voter ID law.
Reaction has been predictably partisan with the liberals blasting the decision, and the GOPers hailing it as common sense protection against voter fraud. IN SoS Todd Rokita said, "“This says to the voter you can have confidence again in the elections because we’re doing some of the things the guy at the video store does when you go and rent a video.”
Makes sense. You have to show ID to make a bank deposit/withdrawal, rent a car, to pick up your prescriptions, to get on an airplane, and as Todd points out, to rent a video - so why not to cast your ballot? I rather think that it protects your franchise rather than diminish it. I have worked in many campaigns and it seems to me that it is always easier to get a ballot thrown out than to get one counted. The Indiana law makes it much harder to challenge a ballot when election officials have verified the identity of the voter.
Case in point: One of the Plaintiffs in the suit was a woman who was registered to vote in two places (Indiana & Florida) proving, in my mind, that the Indiana law accomplishes what it is intended to do. I feel better knowing that my vote will not be diluted by someone else voting twice, thrice, or from Crown Hill Cemetery.
H/T Election Journal, SoS Todd Rokita