Supreme Court blocks Wisconsin's voter ID law

[Straw Man]

you remind me of a guy in my fantasy football league who suggested a trade and then promptly reject said trade when I submitted it acting like I was a jack ass for thinking he would consider such a thing forgetting all along that he was the one who brought it up.

hahha youre so fucking lost in this argument straw you dont know whats up or down.

please clarify it for me

[Garbage Man]

Next thing you know, gay people are going to be able to vote.

[whork]

you remind me of a guy in my fantasy football league who suggested a trade and then promptly reject said trade when I submitted it acting like I was a jack ass for thinking he would consider such a thing forgetting all along that he was the one who brought it up.

hahha youre so fucking lost in this argument straw you dont know whats up or down.

You remind me of this idiot poster on GB who is retarded.

His name is Tony something..

[chadstallion]

Next thing you know, gay people are going to be able to vote.

oh oh....that means SoulCrusher finally gets to vote!

[Princess L]

If it's free then how can people claim this is some kind of financial burden?  Or that it prevents people from voting?  

It's just a veiled excuse to commit fraud.  It's so ridiculously easy.
Especially with groups like the Greater Wisconsin Committee, (a lefty group sending out these letters with your neighbor's names and addresses telling you whether they've voted or not).

Trust me, there are going to be people armed with these little computer printouts at 6-8 o'clock with the names of people who have not yet voted. If people someone from out of state, one of these union guys, etc. walk in to one of your polling places and says,"I'm so and so," there's nothing that stops that person from voting. Nothing.

[Shockwave]

It's just a veiled excuse to commit fraud.  It's so ridiculously easy.
Especially with groups like the Greater Wisconsin Committee, (a lefty group sending out these letters with your neighbor's names and addresses telling you whether they've voted or not).

Trust me, there are going to be people armed with these little computer printouts at 6-8 o'clock with the names of people who have not yet voted. If people someone from out of state, one of these union guys, etc. walk in to one of your polling places and says,"I'm so and so," there's nothing that stops that person from voting. Nothing.

Yeah, fuck that. I feel like this whining about people staying home if they have to show ID is just them throwing a fit and pouting that theyll have to prove their identity.

Fuck, give them some kind of free Federal ID to vote for all o care. Oh, wait, theyd have to prove their identity to get a free ID as well so theyd probably be 'suppressed' because its just too damn burdensome to actually prove you are who you say you..... like everyone has to do every single day.

What a fucking joke this is. You cant prove you indentiry and eligibility to vote, you dont get to vote. Thats all therebshould be too it.

[Straw Man]

It's just a veiled excuse to commit fraud.  It's so ridiculously easy.
Especially with groups like the Greater Wisconsin Committee, (a lefty group sending out these letters with your neighbor's names and addresses telling you whether they've voted or not).

Trust me, there are going to be people armed with these little computer printouts at 6-8 o'clock with the names of people who have not yet voted. If people someone from out of state, one of these union guys, etc. walk in to one of your polling places and says,"I'm so and so," there's nothing that stops that person from voting. Nothing.

http://www.salon.com/2014/10/13/gop_voter_id_law_gets_crushed_why_judge_richard_posners_ruling_is_so_amazing/

you should check the opinion of the conservative icon Judge Richard Posner, the Reagan-appointed 7th Circuit Court of Appeals judge who was the one who approved the first such Photo ID law in the country (Indiana’s) back in 2008, in the landmark Crawford v. Marion County case which went all the way to the Supreme Court, where Posner’s ruling was affirmed.

This opinion, written on behalf of five judges on the 7th Circuit, thoroughly disabuses such notions such as: these laws are meant to deal with a phantom voter fraud concern (“Out of 146 million registered voters, this is a ratio of one case of voter fraud for every 14.6 million eligible voters”); that evidence shows them to be little more than baldly partisan attempts to keep Democratic voters from voting (“conservative states try to make it difficult for people who are outside the mainstream…to vote”); that rightwing partisan outfits like True the Vote, which support such laws, present “evidence” of impersonation fraud that is “downright goofy, if not paranoid”; and the notion that even though there is virtually zero fraud that could even possibly be deterred by Photo ID restrictions, the fact that the public thinks there is, is a lousy reason to disenfranchise voters since there is no evidence that such laws actually increase public confidence in elections and, as new studies now reveal, such laws have indeed served to suppress turnout in states where they have been enacted.

There is far too much in it to appropriately encapsulate here for now. You just really need to take some time to read it in full. But it was written, largely, in response to the Appellate Court ruling last week by rightwing Judge Frank Easterbrook which contained one embarrassing falsehood and error after another, including the canards about Photo ID being required to board airplanes, open bank accounts, buy beer and guns, etc. We took apart just that one paragraph of Easterbrook’s ruling last week here, but Posner takes apart his colleague’s entire, error-riddled mess of a ruling in this response.

Amongst my favorite passages (and there are so many), this one [emphasis added]…

The panel is not troubled by the absence of evidence. It deems the supposed beneficial effect of photo ID requirements on public confidence in the electoral system “‘a legislative fact’-a proposition about the state of the world,” and asserts that “on matters of legislative fact, courts accept the findings of legislatures and judges of the lower courts must accept findings by the Supreme Court.” In so saying, the panel conjures up a fact-free cocoon in which to lodge the federal judiciary. As there is no evidence that voter impersonation fraud is a problem, how can the fact that a legislature says it’s a problem turn it into one? If the Wisconsin legislature says witches are a problem, shall Wisconsin courts be permitted to conduct witch trials? If the Supreme Court once thought that requiring photo identification increases public confidence in elections, and experience and academic study since shows that the Court was mistaken, do we do a favor to the Court-do we increase public confidence in elections-by making the mistake a premise of our decision? Pressed to its logical extreme the panel’s interpretation of and deference to legislative facts would require upholding a photo ID voter law even if it were uncontested that the law eliminated no fraud but did depress turnout significantly.

And this one…

There is only one motivation for imposing burdens on voting that are ostensibly designed to discourage voter-impersonation fraud, if there is no actual danger of such fraud, and that is to discourage voting by persons likely to vote against the party responsible for imposing the burdens.

And remember, once again, this is written by Richard Posner, the conservative Republican icon of a federal appellate court judge — the judge who wrote the opinion on behalf of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals approving of the first such Photo ID law in the country in 2008, the very case that rightwingers from Texas to Wisconsin now cite over and over (almost always incorrectly) in support of similar such laws — now, clearly admitting that he got the entire thing wrong.

[Princess L]

All the fraudsters must be out of Wisconsin then. 

http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/shorewood-man-charged-with-13-counts-of-voter-fraud-b99297733z1-264322221.html

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/03/24/prosecutors-in-wisconsin-charge-10-people-with-voter-fraud-57397

[Straw Man]

All the fraudsters must be out of Wisconsin then.  

http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/shorewood-man-charged-with-13-counts-of-voter-fraud-b99297733z1-264322221.html

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/03/24/prosecutors-in-wisconsin-charge-10-people-with-voter-fraud-57397

I'm glad you brought this up

the guy in the first link is Robert D Monroe and his fraudulent voting was on behalf of a Republican Scott Walker

Note how the ability to show an ID did not PREVENT fraud.   Note also that he did not even need an ID to vote absentee

so here's the bottom line -  having an ID didn't prevent an isolated case of fraud but not having an ID has discouraged/disenfranchised 100k + of eligible voters

Both of these points were address by Judge Posner in the link that I gave you (and multiple links within)

these two examples also show not only how isolated voter fraud it but also how relatively easy it is to catch

[Soul Crusher]

Why do I need an ID to obtain a firearm? 

I'm glad you brought this up

the guy in the first link is Robert D Monroe and his fraudulent voting was on behalf of a Republican Scott Walker

Note how the ability to show an ID did not PREVENT fraud.   Note also that he did not even need an ID to vote absentee

so here's the bottom line -  having an ID didn't prevent an isolated case of fraud but not having an ID has discouraged/disenfranchised 100k + of eligible voters

Both of these points were address by Judge Posner in the link that I gave you (and multiple links within)

these two examples also show not only how isolated voter fraud it but also how relatively easy it is to catch

[Straw Man]

Why do I need an ID to obtain a firearm? 

you don't in the vast majority of the country but since you brought up guns why don't we have a registry of guns and gun owners like we do for voters?

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/08/29/2550851/guns/

[Soul Crusher]

you don't in the vast majority of the country but since you brought up guns why don't we have a registry of guns and gun owners like we do for voters?

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/08/29/2550851/guns/

That list is utter nonsense.  Ever hear of the NICS system moron? 

[Straw Man]

That list is utter nonsense.  Ever hear of the NICS system moron?  

you're not really a lawyer are you?

http://www.salon.com/2013/08/29/clintons_line_was_true_the_sad_facts_about_assault_weapons_and_voting/

As for guns, under federal law, you can buy a gun through a private seller without even showing an ID. And assault weapons have been fair game since the ban on them expired in 2004. Here’s a Department of Justice report (emphasis added):

Individuals who buy guns from an unlicensed private seller in a “secondary market venue” (such as gun shows, flea markets, and Internet sites) are exempt from the requirements of federal law to show identification, complete the Form 4473, and undergo a National Instant Criminal Background Check System check.

[Soul Crusher]

you're not really a lawyer are you?

http://www.salon.com/2013/08/29/clintons_line_was_true_the_sad_facts_about_assault_weapons_and_voting/

and the problem is?  There is no problem statistically w "assault weapons" - so according to your logic - we should there be a regististry or id requirement?

[Straw Man]

and the problem is?  There is no problem statistically w "assault weapons" - so according to your logic - we should there be a regististry or id requirement?

so you admit you're wrong about needing an ID to buy a gun

so how about a registry for gun owners just like voters

[Soul Crusher]

so you admit you're wrong about needing an ID to buy a gun

so how about a registry for gun owners just like voters

What is the point of a gun registry? 

[Shockwave]

http://www.salon.com/2014/10/13/gop_voter_id_law_gets_crushed_why_judge_richard_posners_ruling_is_so_amazing/

you should check the opinion of the conservative icon Judge Richard Posner, the Reagan-appointed 7th Circuit Court of Appeals judge who was the one who approved the first such Photo ID law in the country (Indiana’s) back in 2008, in the landmark Crawford v. Marion County case which went all the way to the Supreme Court, where Posner’s ruling was affirmed.

yes, one judges opinion totally invalidates everones opinions.

FYI personally know of an entire family of illegal mexicans that all voted between 4 and 6 times a piece, each with separate fraudulent SS cards that they forged... this family forges these cards, and they sell them to the inbound illegal families, as they alll have full disability and welfare.

Voter fraud is very real.

[Straw Man]

What is the point of a gun registry? 

so you admit you were completely wrong about needing an ID to buy a gun

right?

since you're the one that brought up guns why don't you start a thread about it

this thread it about Voter ID laws

[Straw Man]

yes, one judges opinion totally invalidates everones opinions.

FYI personally know of an entire family of illegal mexicans that all voted between 4 and 6 times a piece, each with separate fraudulent SS cards that they forged... this family forges these cards, and they sell them to the inbound illegal families, as they alll have full disability and welfare.

Voter fraud is very real.

that particular judges opinion is particularly salient

and you're totally correct

voter fraud is very real and very very very very rare and very easy to catch

again, having an ID doesn't even prevent the very very very rare case of fraud but it's very very very effective at disenfranchising 100k + voters

[Soul Crusher]

yes, one judges opinion totally invalidates everones opinions.

FYI personally know of an entire family of illegal mexicans that all voted between 4 and 6 times a piece, each with separate fraudulent SS cards that they forged... this family forges these cards, and they sell them to the inbound illegal families, as they alll have full disability and welfare.

Voter fraud is very real.

I was a poll watcher in 2000 and 2004 - I saw a lot of shady shit going on in the polling places in mostly minority areas.   Funny how when those fools have to stand in line to vote for more free stuff - they are quiet.  Yet when they are in line at the check out at the supermarket - they act like its feeding time at the zoo.  

[Shockwave]

that particular judges opinion is particularly salient

and you're totally correct

voter fraud is very real and very very very very rare and very easy to catch

again, having an ID doesn't even prevent the very very very rate case of fraud but it's very very very effective at disenfranchising 100k + voters

your confirmation bias is hilarious.

[Straw Man]

your confirmation bias is hilarious.

yep, the conservative judge who approved the first voter ID law now does a complete 180 and lays out the facts of his error and I choose to look at it and you choose to completely ignore every fact that he has presented

hilarious

[Dos Equis]

It's just a veiled excuse to commit fraud.  It's so ridiculously easy.
Especially with groups like the Greater Wisconsin Committee, (a lefty group sending out these letters with your neighbor's names and addresses telling you whether they've voted or not).

Trust me, there are going to be people armed with these little computer printouts at 6-8 o'clock with the names of people who have not yet voted. If people someone from out of state, one of these union guys, etc. walk in to one of your polling places and says,"I'm so and so," there's nothing that stops that person from voting. Nothing.

So the entire opposition to this is BS?  Not surprised. 

I don't see why voting should be any different than registering your car or any of the host of things that require an ID.

[Shockwave]

yep, the conservative judge who approved the first voter ID law now does a complete 180 and lays out the facts of his error and I choose to look at it and you choose to completely ignore every fact that he has presented

hilarious

yes, thats totally what happened. Because 1 conservative judge and a couple shitbag republicans have an opiniom i should just totally flip my opinion because some shitheads whine about having to show ID to fucking vote.

Wah. Your argument has next to no logical backing, its basically

'eligable voters wont vote if they have to show ID and a conservative judge think its unfair, so you should too
 Oh, and a couple republicans hope that it DOES suppress votes so therefore is merits invalidated."

It makes no logical sense. If those people are too fckn lazy to get an ID or proof of identity then IMO they dont deserve to vote.

I couldnt care less if they were republicans refusing to vote if they hd to show ID, if you cant prove your identity you dont fucking vote. There is no logical argument against that. Ever other argument ive seen is just grasping at straws to justify why people shouldnt have to orove who they are to vote.

[loco]

Dems want illegals to vote.  That's why Dems offer illegals amnesty right before elections.