Penn. voter ID law is rejected

  • Article by: Sari Horwitz , Washington Post
  • Updated: January 17, 2014 - 11:51 PM

Law places undue burden on voting public, judge says.

  • 8
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 8 of 8
avejoeconJan. 18, 14 8:19 AM

Maybe this judge needs to review the SCOTUS ruling on this.

2
7
badgerfan2Jan. 18, 14 9:00 AM

The gig is up on this, everyone knows these laws are designed to suppress votes specifically those who are disabled, elderly, etc and are of course unlikely to vote republican. There is no evidence of any voter fraud which is the reason given why these stupid laws are supposedly needed. These so called cases number in the single digits out of millions of votes cast. Minnesota did well to reject this stupidity and now it is up to the courts to strike it down in states that we're too stupid to put a halt to this nonsense.

4
2
avejoeconJan. 18, 1411:02 AM

The gig is up on this, everyone knows these laws are designed to suppress votes specifically those who are disabled, elderly, etc and are of course unlikely to vote republican.----------HOW are they designed to suppress one group over the other. Are you actually claiming that some groups are too dumb to get a ID. And, still waiting for the name of ONE person that was not able to vote because of voter ID. Funny how no one can give that ONE name.

1
3
paradosJan. 18, 1411:20 AM

SCOTUS has nothing to do with this avejoecon since it was a state court ruling the law violated the state's constitution.

1
1
avejoeconJan. 18, 1411:55 AM

SCOTUS has nothing to do with this avejoecon since it was a state court ruling the law violated the state's constitution.=======Unforntunately for you, the SCOTUS DOES have everything to do with this. It set the precedence. It has already stated that this is NOT a burden on the people.

1
2
johneramone4Jan. 18, 1412:16 PM

If you aere over the age of 18, living inthe USA and dn't have avalid ID, not being able to vote is the LEAST of your problems. There is only one reason anyone couldpossibly be against vote ID requirements. They support votrer fraud. Seeing as how there is absoulutly nothing standing in the way of any legitimate voter from obtaining a valid form of ID. Tjere os simply no other feasible expalnaiton. Besides, the U.S. Supremee Coourt already ruled in "Crawford v. Marion County Eleciton Board" Voter ID requirements are 100% Constitutional.

0
1
johneramone4Jan. 18, 1412:19 PM

This headline is misleading at best. Vote ID was not rejected, it was kyboshed by yet another Left wing activist judge who has zero regard for the constitution of the U.S.

2
1
lordhawhaw1Jan. 18, 14 4:36 PM

The gig is up on this. In an era of close elections the liberals want to keep every tool available in their toolbox to win an election.

1
1
  • 1 - 8 of 8

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT