(05-26-2020 10:45 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crawford_v...tion_Board

the Court held that an Indiana law requiring voters to provide photographic identification did not violate the United States Constitution.
the Supreme Court delivered judgment in favor of Marion County, affirming the court below by a 6-3 vote

Justice Stevens upheld the constitutionality of the photo ID requirement, finding it closely related to Indiana's legitimate state interest in preventing voter fraud, modernizing elections, and safeguarding voter confidence. Justice Stevens, in the leading opinion, stated that the burdens placed on voters are limited to a small percentage of the population and were offset by the state's interest in reducing fraud.

I'm paraphrasing Breyer, but he basically said that while voter ID was acceptable, the specifics of Indiana's was not for some reason.

so it was really 7-2 in favor of SOME form of 'voter id'.... and ALL of them supported the idea that a 'reasonable burden' on voting was allowable.
Souter and Ginsberg basically said was that the state had the burden of proving fraud... which of course is almost impossible without someone simply admitting it.... because you have no way to verify someone's identity.

As I said... Having a valid ID allows you better access to our financial, healthcare and employment systems. Failing to have an ID hampers you, sometimes significantly in these areas (and others). We all know that requiring registration is legal... and we put lots of money and effort into that. Replace registration with ID and you've spent NO more money AND you've made people's lives easier.

Someone please tell me why we don't go to great effort to get people IDs as a general course, outside of elections.... and if they have a valid ID, why we'd need 'registration drives'.

Helping people get IDs is a core service of many homeless agencies, church ministries, soup kitchens and so on.