Announcement

Collapse

Facebook Forum Migration

Our forums have migrated to Facebook. If you are already an iMSN forum member you will be grandfathered in.

To access the Call Room and Marriage Matters, head to: https://m.facebook.com/groups/400932...eferrer=search

You can find the health and fitness forums here: https://m.facebook.com/groups/133538...eferrer=search

Private parenting discussions are here: https://m.facebook.com/groups/382903...eferrer=search

We look forward to seeing you on Facebook!
See more
See less

Supreme Court's Ruling Yesterday

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Supreme Court's Ruling Yesterday

    This one has flown under the radar, more or less, because of the Wright story...but there was another really big, national story yesterday: the Supreme Court upheld an Indiana statute that requires voters to produce approved ID (passport, driver's license, state-issued ID, etc.) in order to vote. There are certain exceptions (most notably, if you show up without ID, you have ten days to bring it in to prove up your eligibility, before your vote will be voided). But there has been a lot of opposition disappointment expressed at the opinion.

    Anyone have any thoughts?
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Supreme Court's Ruling Yesterday

    I think there should be as few obstacles as possible to exercising the right to vote. How big a burden is it to get a state issued ID card? It seems like someone might need it for other things. I had to have ID to register my daughter for public school to prove that our address was in the boundaries of the school (I didn't have a state ID at that point and used utility bills and don't remember if I also had to show the ID for my name and photo to match).

    I've always been surprised when I haven't been asked for ID to vote because I'm so accustomed to showing it in other circumstances. Now I only vote by mail so I'm not sure how the ID issue would be handled (I wonder what they will do in Indiana?).

    That said...I just realized that if our state had a similar law, my MIL couldn't vote. After two years, we still have not done a state ID card for her. I don't think she can vote anyway because I don't think we have her registered here. It is sort of odd in Oregon -- you just sign up. No ID for that either. I did it at a farmer's market.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Supreme Court's Ruling Yesterday

      I don't have a problem with this ruling either. It seems like a reasonable request. I have always had ID when voting --- and at the last election they DID require it. I'm not sure why, but we got a mailing to that effect and they actually checked ID. It wasn't a big deal.

      I agree that getting an ID should be both easy and free. I'm not sure how to make that happen, but that seems like a problem we should solve for many reasons.
      Angie
      Gyn-Onc fellowship survivor - 10 years out of the training years; reluctant suburbanite
      Mom to DS (18) and DD (15) (and many many pets)

      "Where are we going - and what am I doing in this handbasket?"

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Supreme Court's Ruling Yesterday

        The problems lies with what you need to GET a state issued ID. For clients such as mine (obviously not the felons...) who are transient and for whom $20 bucks is way out of the realm of possibility to get a copy of the birth certificate, and who don't have vehicles, it's just one more thing to add to the list of stuff that is ridiculously hard to do.

        We all know what we need to do to get a copy of our Social Security Card or Birth Certificate. WE can do it online and pay for it with our debit cards. Not so easy for our more marginal citizens.

        Jenn

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Supreme Court's Ruling Yesterday

          I'm with the 'I don't have a problem with it' camp. I can see how it's troublesome for some to attain a state ID, but many will plug through that in order to buy alcohol, etc. The cost isn't oppressive, and there aren't all sorts of steps to attain one.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Supreme Court's Ruling Yesterday

            Originally posted by oceanchild
            Also, Abigail, don't you think the Supreme Court has kind of flown under the radar generally this term? There were a couple cases that were really important in my office (Medellin, Boumediene, possibly some others I'm forgetting), but I felt like they hardly even made the news.

            But maybe that's just me.
            Medellin? Make big news? Funny...That would require people being interested in a discussion of Medellin's limitations on executive authority and the meaning of a self-executing treaty. Good luck... Why be cover that when Brittany Spears isn't wearing underwear?

            I think, in general, the importance and impact of the Supreme Court--every session--is not sufficiently covered. The only time people seem interested in the Supreme Court is when there is a seat to fill and only issue people (who care at all) seem to care about is abortion.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Supreme Court's Ruling Yesterday

              It depends on where the place to vote is, how accessible it is to the bus routes and whether they need to leave work in order to vote.

              Nothing is easy for people on the fringe.

              Jenn

              Comment

              Previous template Next
              Working...
              X