Surprise: SCOTUS upholds Wisconsin voter-ID law

posted at 12:01 pm on March 23, 2015 by Ed Morrissey

Or maybe not such a surprise after all. The path to today’s Supreme Court decision to refuse an appeal by the ACLU against Wisconsin’s voter-ID law has been strewn with appellate decisions that supported its implementation, although a last-minute stay by SCOTUS kept it out of play for the midterms. The law will fully take effect for the 2016 election, which may complicate efforts by Democrats to keep the state blue:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday left intact a new Republican-backed law in Wisconsin that requires voters to present photo identification when they cast ballots.

The court declined to hear an appeal filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, which challenged the law. …

A federal judge blocked the state’s voter ID law in March 2012 soon after it took effect and entered a permanent injunction in April, finding the measure would deter or prevent a substantial number of voters who lack photo identification from casting ballots, and place an unnecessary burden on the poor and minorities.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the decision and subsequently ruled in October that the law was constitutional. Wisconsin’s Supreme Court upheld the voter ID law in a separate ruling.

The SCOTUS stay in October had more to do with the timing of the law, thanks to the scheduling of the challenges through the courts. Regardless, the election still went in favor of Scott Walker and the GOP, preventing Democrats from repealing the voter-ID provision before it could come into effect.

This will put a huge dent in the Obama administration’s efforts to squelch voter-ID laws in other states. In order to grant certiorari, the ACLU would have needed four justices to vote to add it to the docket. The fact that they couldn’t even move the liberal wing to unite against a voter-ID law shows that the justices consider the issue settled. Requirements for identification at polling stations are legitimate, in the eyes of the court, as long as enough options for no-cost qualifying ID exist to keep the poor from being disenfranchised.

The dismissal of this challenge to the law will also help boost Walker’s efforts outside of Wisconsin. He’s known for reforming the public-employee unions, balancing the budget, and most recently for signing Right to Work legislation even if he advised the Republican-controlled legislature to move more slowly on the latter. Some forget that Walker backed the voter-ID legislation as part of his reform package that got him elected in 2010, and then reconfirmed in 2012 and re-elected again in 2014. It gives Walker an argument to position himself as the reformer who has a real track record of conservative change in a purple state, change that could turn the state red for good.

However, the Supreme Court decision isn’t keeping the ACLU from demanding yet another delay, on the same basis as the last one:

The Wisconsin state elections board says it is awaiting direction from the state Department of Justice about what comes next now that the U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear a challenge to the state’s voter identification law.

The American Civil Liberties Union asked a federal appeals court to block implementation of the law for the April 7 election.

If the ACLU gets its waiver, it had better enjoy it — because it will be its last.

Update: It’s more accurate to say that the refusal to grant cert in this case upholds the law rather than approves it, although functionally it’s the same thing. I’ve changed the headline from “approves” to “upholds.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

bluegill on March 23, 2015 at 2:56 PM

Gassp! I’m breathless! It must be primary season. Do I smell impurity? Gasp! There shall be no impurity with impunity! We must have vetting! We must! Thanks for the laugh, bluegill.

rhombus on March 23, 2015 at 3:55 PM

What part of the SCOTUS upholding the Wisconsin ID law means having to have an ID is not an unconstitutional poll tax don’t you get ?

F X Muldoon on March 23, 2015 at 3:31 PM

While I understand your point, I tend to stay away from arguments that “x” is correct because “SCOTUS said so” since I disagree with so many other decisions from SCOTUS and believe they are wrong on the constitution in other decisions.

It’s one of those things where I feel if I assert SCOTUS as the final arbiter of the Constitution (although in practicality it is), I have to accept as correct those decisions SCOTUS clearly gets wrong. It’s one thing to accept that SCOTUS issued a decision and such decision is binding and another to agree that the SCOTUS decision is correct.

I would simply point out that it doesn’t matter what he thinks now because SCOTUS has upheld it.

Monkeytoe on March 23, 2015 at 3:59 PM

Give tailgate a break. He saw photo and poll in this thread and immediately thought of Polaroids and strippers.

He just got a little revved up is all.

HonestLib on March 23, 2015 at 4:02 PM

So Tlaloc, we come back to another question that once again, I have asked you before, and once again, you ran away from rather than answer:

So you think everyone should be required to vote….

…but no one should have to identify themselves to do so.

Right?

GrumpyOldFart on March 23, 2015 at 4:04 PM

What part of the SCOTUS upholding the Wisconsin ID law means having to have an ID is not an unconstitutional poll tax don’t you get ?

F X Muldoon on March 23, 2015 at 3:31 PM

Problem is people only seem to scream when their ox is gored. How did you feel about Citizens United and Robert’s thought process on The ACA. I am asking to see where your Constitutional hat rests as I don’t remember any of your comments.

HonestLib on March 23, 2015 at 4:11 PM

Problem is people only seem to scream when their ox is gored.

Only when comparing Granny Smiths to lugnuts, not to Golden Deliciouses.

F X Muldoon on March 23, 2015 at 4:27 PM

F X Muldoon on March 23, 2015 at 4:27 PM

The defense rests. It is apple sauce for all the toddlers.

HonestLib on March 23, 2015 at 5:13 PM

It is apple sauce for all the toddlers.

Indeed, and whilst enjoying that fine apple sauce would be a fine time for Aztec toddlers to contemplate how something that is given to you for free could in any way be construed as a tax.

F X Muldoon on March 23, 2015 at 5:27 PM

EXCLUSIVE — MICHELLE MALKIN: SCOTT WALKER DESERVES TO BE VETTED, ‘PROBLEMS’ MUCH BIGGER THAN OUSTED PRO-AMNESTY AIDE

Nationally syndicated conservative columnist Michelle Malkin, founder of the website Twitchy, tells Breitbart News that Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker—a potential 2016 GOP presidential candidate—needs to be vetted. She also says Walker’s “problems” run much deeper than the decision to hire—then quickly let go of—pro-amnesty communications aide Liz Mair, who had taken shots at Iowa.

“Scott Walker has much bigger problems than the ill-considered hiring and firing of one D.C. operative,” Malkin said in an email.

What does he really stand for and is he fully equipped to bear the slings and arrows of his enemies on a national and global scale? Yes, he fought Big Labor and has managed his state well. But grass-roots activists in his state have long been warning me of his ideological gymnastics on core issues: immigration and education.

He has been on the same side as the progressive Left and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Right: pro-amnesty, pro-massive legal immigration expansionist, and pro-Common Core. He’s been left, right, center, and all over the map.

She added that Washington-based GOP establishment forces are good at backing up establishment politicians, as they seemed to have tried to do to defend Walker and Mair.

Read it all: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/18/exclusive-michelle-malkin-scott-walker-deserves-to-be-vetted-problems-much-bigger-than-ousted-pro-amnesty-aide/

Gassp! I’m breathless! It must be primary season. Do I smell impurity? Gasp! There shall be no impurity with impunity! We must have vetting! We must! Thanks for the laugh, bluegill.

rhombus on March 23, 2015 at 3:55 PM

How pathetic that you minimize and excuse Scott Walker’s shameful support for illegal alien amnesty as mere “impurity.” Rather than hold certain politicians to account for their pro-amnesty records, you belittle people like Michelle Malkin and others who call for thorough vetting.

I understand that former Mittbots have now taken to making excuses for establishment-backed Scott Walker, but 2016 is not going to be like 2012.

bluegill on March 23, 2015 at 5:32 PM

Indeed, and whilst enjoying that fine apple sauce would be a fine time for Aztec toddlers to contemplate how something that is given to you for free could in any way be construed as a tax.

F X Muldoon on March 23, 2015 at 5:27 PM</blockquote

But is our special lad more rain or fertility?

Hey, I do eat applesauce daily, mixed with strawberries. They say it is good for me. Bah, beer is better.

HonestLib on March 23, 2015 at 5:41 PM

I understand that former Mittbots have now taken to making excuses for establishment-backed Scott Walker, but 2016 is not going to be like 2012.

bluegill on March 23, 2015 at 5:32 PM

You are sometimes wound tighter than a two dollar watch spring. Honest question, how is your blood pressure?

HonestLib on March 23, 2015 at 5:43 PM

Walker can’t be trusted.

bluegill on March 23, 2015 at 2:56 PM

Why is it so hard for you to stick to the topic of threads like this, and leave your Walker-bashing for appropriate ones?

You can be such an obsessive, inconsiderate moron at times…

Anti-ControI on March 23, 2015 at 5:53 PM

What a shameful, Jim Crow era attempt by the Reich wing Republicans to make sure that all votes are fairly counted and are cast by real people rather than someone’s long buried Democrat grandma two counties over.

This “minority” (barf) Republican approves.

JoseQuinones on March 23, 2015 at 6:20 PM

So Tlaloc, we come back to another question that once again, I have asked you before, and once again, you ran away from rather than answer:

So you think everyone should be required to vote….

…but no one should have to identify themselves to do so.

Right?

GrumpyOldFart on March 23, 2015 at 4:04 PM

I’m fine with voter ID provided you give every american citizen a free ID and can show incontovertible evidence that that program has been 99+% successful.

But since the only point of voter ID is to disenfranchise democratic voters the GOP will never go for it…

Tlaloc on March 23, 2015 at 6:28 PM

What part of the SCOTUS upholding the Wisconsin ID law means having to have an ID is not an unconstitutional poll tax don’t you get ?

F X Muldoon on March 23, 2015 at 3:31 PM

Really, they made an affirmitive ruling to that end?

Oh, no, that’s just how you choose to interpret their not taking the case. Right.

Tlaloc on March 23, 2015 at 6:31 PM

IDs are a poll tax? Is it a tax if you can get one for free from the state DMV? What is the cost of a $0 tax? Can the poor even afford $0?

You aren’t very bright.

dominigan on March 23, 2015 at 2:37 PM

But they aren’t free. SO while it’s neat that you like to make up alternate realities where your views are justified, why don;t we deal with actual reality where you’re completely wrong.

Tlaloc on March 23, 2015 at 6:32 PM

But they aren’t free.

What part of “free” How to Get a Free State ID Card for Voting are you having difficulty with ?

F X Muldoon on March 23, 2015 at 6:47 PM

But since the only point of voter ID is to disenfranchise democratic voters…

Tlaloc on March 23, 2015 at 6:28 PM

What are you basing that claim on?

Mimzey on March 23, 2015 at 6:50 PM

What are you basing that claim on?

As with everything, talking points given to him or “facts” pulled out of his fourth point of contact.

F X Muldoon on March 23, 2015 at 6:54 PM

But they aren’t free.

Tlaloc on March 23, 2015 at 6:32 PM

So what? If a person cannot scrape together a few bucks once given a few years, then voting is not important to that person. That being said…you can get one free.
The only time I hear of someone not having an ID is when I’m watching COPS. I don’t know anyone who does not have an ID. Do you?

Mimzey on March 23, 2015 at 6:54 PM

I’m fine with voter ID provided you give every american citizen a free ID and can show incontovertible evidence that that program has been 99+% successful.

–I’m a-okay with this, provided that “american citizen” is determined through birth certificates which have zero chance of being fraudulent.

But since the only point of voter ID is to disenfranchise democratic voters the GOP will never go for it…

Tlaloc on March 23, 2015 at 6:28 PM

The only people being disenfranchised are those voters who vote democrat because they’re EXPECTED TO.

You really are a dope.

jersey taxpayer on March 23, 2015 at 6:54 PM

You really are a dope.

jersey taxpayer on March 23, 2015 at 6:54 PM

Debating with Brainloc is like trying to reason with Baghdad Bob – facts/reality simply are not factored in to what he says. lol :)

Anti-ControI on March 23, 2015 at 7:03 PM

But since the only point of voter ID is to disenfranchise democratic voters the GOP will never go for it…

Tlaloc on March 23, 2015 at 6:28 PM

Only if you assume that all the illegal alien vote, all the graveyard vote and all the people who vote multiple times are all Democrats.

Is that what you’re asserting here?

GrumpyOldFart on March 23, 2015 at 7:12 PM

Debating with Brainloc is like trying to reason with Baghdad Bob – facts/reality simply are not factored in to what he says. lol :)

Anti-ControI on March 23, 2015 at 7:03 PM

That was hardly ‘debate.’ (If/when I do, there’d be a hell of a lot more factual info.

That was simply reply. Even that, here lately, I find few reasons to contribute.

On the bright side — can one even imagine Mr. Cruz’s nominations to SCOTUS? Good Lord, from my heart to your ears :)

jersey taxpayer on March 23, 2015 at 7:18 PM

Congrats to Governor Walker and the great state of Wisconsin! Go Pack!!!

Bmore on March 23, 2015 at 7:40 PM

Tialoc , quit drinking the kool-aid. Holy shite.

CW on March 23, 2015 at 8:03 PM

This is little help now. With one wave of Obutthole’s pen the illegals now have IDs and partial status here in the USA. With another wave of Obutthole’s pen, they will be citizens with full voting rights.

paulsur on March 23, 2015 at 8:04 PM

Anti-ControI on March 23, 2015 at 5:53 PM

In case you haven’t read the article, you should know that Walker’s record and his ability to sell that record to voters is absolutely covered. Therefore, discussions of Walker’s whole record, including his support for illegal alien amnesty and his flip-flopping on Common Core, is more than appropriate.

We will continue to draw attention to this and other relevant issues. Thank you for your feedback and have a nice day.

bluegill on March 23, 2015 at 8:16 PM

That was hardly ‘debate.’ (If/when I do, there’d be a hell of a lot more factual info.

That was simply reply.

Well, I didn’t think you rightfully calling Brainloc a dope constituted a debate, either. :)

Even that, here lately, I find few reasons to contribute.

We all must find our own reasons… :)

On the bright side — can one even imagine Mr. Cruz’s nominations to SCOTUS? Good Lord, from my heart to your ears :)

jersey taxpayer on March 23, 2015 at 7:18 PM

haha hearing the leftards on anything ‘Ted Cruz’ is entertaining enough for me, but that scenario would be extra special! :D

Anti-ControI on March 23, 2015 at 8:26 PM

In case you haven’t read the article, you should know that Walker’s record and his ability to sell that record to voters is absolutely covered. Therefore, discussions of Walker’s whole record, including his support for illegal alien amnesty and his flip-flopping on Common Core, is more than appropriate.

Oh, says you, and besides you and anotherJoe, I am very confident that no one else at HA would agree with your pitiful rationalization! lol

We will continue to draw attention to this and other relevant issues. Thank you for your feedback and have a nice day.

bluegill on March 23, 2015 at 8:16 PM

I’ve seen similar off-topic posts of yours get deleted – seems like you didn’t learn the lesson you should have yet.

Anti-ControI on March 23, 2015 at 8:32 PM

[Walker is] known for reforming the public-employee unions, balancing the budget, and most recently for signining Right to Work legislation even if he advised the Republican-controlled legislature to move more slowly on the latter.

-liberal Republican Ed Morrissey on Walker (from above article)

Ed, as Michelle Malkin has discussed, Walker is also known for his squishiness on core issues. See here for Allahpundit’s write-up on concerns about Walker’s record:

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/02/19/scott-walker-approved-milwaukee-county-resolution-backing-2006-mccain-kennedy-amnesty-bill/

bluegill on March 23, 2015 at 9:07 PM

Not having ID makes you a second class citizen. Anyone who supports the Democrat position on this is a racist.

petunia on March 23, 2015 at 9:10 PM

Anti-ControI on March 23, 2015 at 8:32 PM

I would ask you, with respect, to please refrain from unnecessary, petty personal insults that detract from the thread discussion. And making incorrect claims about posts of mine supposedly having been deleted (not true) is also not helpful.

Now, if you have more to add about the SCOTUS decision or about Walker’s record, then great. It’s fine if you don’t agree with mine or others’ opinions expressed here, but there’s no need to get so personal.

bluegill on March 23, 2015 at 9:15 PM

The purity police are once again on the prowl.

But your own deviations from orthodoxy, you completely excuse those.

“Conservatives” (like the idiots here who can find the mote in everyone else’s eye but ignore that beam in their own) are destroying the country every bit as much as liberals… because they live in a fantasy world.

Isn’t Michelle Malkin a big advocate of legalizing pot now? Because she has a good reason… like everyone else’s reasons for supporting stuff aren’t good reasons. Hypocrites.

Scott Walker is fine. He’s a whole lot better than any lying faced Democrat.

Most of the others are fine too. Just give me an R after the name and I’m good now. (Except Newt, that is just silly) Perfection is over rated. Not to mention impossible.

petunia on March 23, 2015 at 9:17 PM

The court (SCOTUS) declined to hear an appeal filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, which challenged the law. …

A federal judge blocked the state’s voter ID law in March 2012 soon after it took effect and entered a permanent injunction in April, finding the measure would deter or prevent a substantial number of voters who lack photo identification from casting ballots, and place an unnecessary burden on the poor and minorities.

Lawrence Hurley @reuters.com on Mon March 23, 2015 at 11:55 AM

.
Anyone who cannot bear the requisite ‘yoke-of-burden’ necessary to acquire a state photo ID should be disbarred from voting.

listens2glenn on March 23, 2015 at 9:23 PM

I would ask you, with respect, to please refrain from unnecessary, petty personal insults that detract from the thread discussion. And making incorrect claims about posts of mine supposedly having been deleted (not true) is also not helpful.

Now, if you have more to add about the SCOTUS decision or about Walker’s record, then great. It’s fine if you don’t agree with mine or others’ opinions expressed here, but there’s no need to get so personal.

bluegill on March 23, 2015 at 9:15 PM

You are a hypocrite who wants to attacks others whenever she feels like it, and be the arbiter of when it’s ok for others…you’re a control freak and a flat-out liar, right here in this very post even, and my personal criticisms of you are perfectly valid.

Now, about the thread’s topic: yay! :D

Anti-ControI on March 23, 2015 at 9:27 PM

bluegill on March 23, 2015 at 2:56 PM

Hey, if amnesty was good enough for Abraham Lincoln, then it certainly should be good enough for Scott Walker.

unclesmrgol on March 23, 2015 at 9:28 PM

The purity police are once again on the prowl.

But your own deviations from orthodoxy, you completely excuse those.

petunia on March 23, 2015 at 9:17 PM

.
Meaning … what ?
.

“Conservatives” (like the idiots here who can find the mote in everyone else’s eye but ignore that beam in their own) are destroying the country every bit as much as liberals… because they live in a fantasy world.

petunia on March 23, 2015 at 9:17 PM

.
Examples, or that statement is worthless.
.

Isn’t Michelle Malkin a big advocate of legalizing pot now? Because she has a good reason… like everyone else’s reasons for supporting stuff aren’t good reasons. Hypocrites.

petunia on March 23, 2015 at 9:17 PM

.
Marijuana shouldn’t have to be legalized “across the board” for Michelle Malkin’s mother (mother-in-law?) to obtain it for pain-control purposes.
There’s no excuse for disbarring ‘marijuana-by-prescription’ for valid medical use, but for “hedonistic pleasure/recreational use” there’s no excuse for legalizing it.

listens2glenn on March 23, 2015 at 9:34 PM

There’s no excuse for disbarring ‘marijuana-by-prescription’ for valid medical use, but for “hedonistic pleasure/recreational use” there’s no excuse for legalizing it.

listens2glenn on March 23, 2015 at 9:34 PM

Other than dismay over the dangers of pot, there is no reason not to legalize it. Worry over such dangers is a reasonable position.

Also…

The US constitution doesn’t forbid it from being legalized. And if a state’s citizens vote to have such legalization enshrined in their state’s constitution, that’s their business. If a state’s legislature passes legalization and isn’t recalled by the voters for doing so, that’s also the state’s business.

Meremortal on March 23, 2015 at 9:46 PM

Wow! GREAT, GREAT NEWS!!!!

Election integrity has become a huge issue here in Colorado. Hey, Scott Walker, YOU ARE MY HERO!!!!

:-))))))

sohumm on March 24, 2015 at 2:40 AM

There’s no excuse for disbarring ‘marijuana-by-prescription’ for valid medical use, but for “hedonistic pleasure/recreational use” there’s no excuse for legalizing it.

listens2glenn on March 23, 2015 at 9:34 PM

.
Other than dismay over the dangers of pot, there is no reason not to legalize it. Worry over such dangers is a reasonable position.

Meremortal on March 23, 2015 at 9:46 PM

.
Here it is … again
.

Also…

The US constitution doesn’t forbid it from being legalized. And if a state’s citizens vote to have such legalization enshrined in their state’s constitution, that’s their business. If a state’s legislature passes legalization and isn’t recalled by the voters for doing so, that’s also the state’s business.

Meremortal on March 23, 2015 at 9:46 PM

.
I don’t believe I said anything challenging the right of any state to enact their own laws legalizing marijuana for any and everything, but I did (in so many words) say it’s stupid and unjustified for marijuana (any chemical, actually) to be legalized for anyone to use for the pure purposes of artificially inducing a sense of “pleasure” within one’s neurological-pathways.

listens2glenn on March 24, 2015 at 3:11 AM

It was the most important voting rights case since the Bush v. Gore dispute that sealed the 2000 election for George W. Bush. But the voter ID ruling lacked the conservative-liberal split that marked the 2000 case.

The law “is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting ‘the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,'” Justice John Paul Stevens said in an opinion that was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy.

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008), is a United States Supreme Court case upholding an Indiana voter ID law by a 6-3 vote.

J_Crater on March 24, 2015 at 7:13 AM

I’m fine with voter ID provided you give every american citizen a free ID and can show incontovertible evidence that that program has been 99+% successful.

Then you unwittingly support voter ID:

Wisconsin ID cards used for voting are FREE.

But since the only point of voter ID is to disenfranchise democratic voters the GOP will never go for it…

Tlaloc on March 23, 2015 at 6:28 PM

So what’s wrong with democratic voters that they’re incapable of getting the free ID? Don’t they need ID for boozing?

Star Bird on March 24, 2015 at 8:42 AM

Hey, anyone remember when the ACLU’s poster child for the disparities of the disproportionally disparaged and disaffected disenfranchised not being able to get voter ID, got Voter ID?

Star Bird on March 24, 2015 at 8:56 AM

But they aren’t free. SO while it’s neat that you like to make up alternate realities where your views are justified, why don;t we deal with actual reality where you’re completely wrong.

Tlaloc on March 23, 2015 at 6:32 PM

As shown in the direct link to Wisconsin’s DMV above, they are in fact free.

No wonder you drones want to control the internet. A simple 10 second Google search easily discredits your WikiPedia-based world view. It’s amusing how “actual reality” consistently conflicts with the Collective’s narrative. No one can blame you for not trying to push it hard though. You’re a good and loyal drone, and I’m sure the Collective will reward you handsomely with some hemp products or perhaps the Nobel Peace Price.

Does it upset you to know that these sorts of things won’t be easy to engage in anymore?

Star Bird on March 24, 2015 at 9:23 AM

Opinion delivered to Eric Holder, who resonds: “Speak to the hand”.

Another Drew on March 24, 2015 at 12:11 PM

Deep State to open investigation of Dark Money funding of SCOTUS.

Another Drew on March 24, 2015 at 12:13 PM

I think “lets stand” is the more appropriate term rather than upholds. Interestingly enough they couldn’t get even 4 liberals to take the case.

ArthurMachado on March 24, 2015 at 2:53 PM

bluegill on March 23, 2015 at 8:16 PM

So don’t vote for him! We get it already, you hate hate hate Scott Walker! God, give it a rest and get a life.

He’s being vetted, you complaining about what you’re complaining about IS VETTING!

Your problem is that you hate him so badly that when anyone says anything positive about him you scream like a little girl that YOU PEOPLE ARE SUPPOSED TO HATE HIM BECAUSE I DO!!!

runawayyyy on March 24, 2015 at 5:47 PM

But since the only point of voter ID is to disenfranchise democratic voters the GOP will never go for it…

Tlaloc on March 23, 2015 at 6:28 PM

As usual, regressive projection and conjecture, not at all supported by actual facts. In states where voter ID has been implemented, Georgia, for example, minority voter turnout was higher than ever.

I assume you’ll trust the left leaning Politico??

“Jason Riley said “black voter turnout in 2012 exceeded the rate of white voter turnout, even in the states with the strictest voter ID laws,” despite the Democrats claiming the voter ID laws suppress the black vote.

While there is debate about the reasons why — and if the phenomenon will last — Riley’s statistic checks out. Census data shows that indeed, for the first time ever, black voter turnout was higher nationally than white voter turnout, and at least just as high in the states with strict voter ID laws.

We rate this claim True.”

DebraChicago on March 24, 2015 at 6:59 PM

Scott Walker is a GREAT candidate. He is my hero on election integrity.

Hey Walker, when are you ever going to travel to Colorado?

sohumm on March 24, 2015 at 7:01 PM

Gee, what a shocker, Tlaloc lies about free voter ID, gets proven that she’s wrong, then runs away. C’mon brainiac, aren’t you going to toss around some more liberal word salad gibberish to avoid the reality that, once again, you’re proven to be FOS? *laughs

DebraChicago on March 24, 2015 at 7:16 PM

Wow, at the risk of sounding like a teenager Tlaloc just got severely owned.

Come on Tlaloc, please explain away that fact or at least just admit you oppose voter ID because you don’t like the thought of democrats not being able to cheat.

Tlaloc, why do you think blacks are incapable of getting ID cards? are you that racist to think they are too stupid to get one? And don’t try to say it is economics. Because in sheer numbers there are nearly more whites in poverty in the US than the entire black population. So wouldn’t you think in your mind that the horribly racist GOP would be in favor of getting all those whites to vote?

Your idiocy is blinding.

The Notorious G.O.P on March 24, 2015 at 10:08 PM

The Notorious G.O.P on March 24, 2015 at 10:08 PM

Or as I said earlier in the thread…

But since the only point of voter ID is to disenfranchise democratic voters the GOP will never go for it…

Tlaloc on March 23, 2015 at 6:28 PM

Only if you assume that all the illegal alien vote, all the graveyard vote and all the people who vote multiple times are all Democrats.

GrumpyOldFart on March 23, 2015 at 7:12 PM

GrumpyOldFart on March 25, 2015 at 10:15 AM