Federal Judge upholds NC Voter ID law
Published April 26, 2016
by Mark Binker, WRAL, April 25, 2016.
North Carolina's voter ID law is constitutional and should remain in effect, U.S. District Judge Thomas Schroeder ruled late Monday.
"Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that Defendants have violated § 2 of the VRA or the Fourteenth, Fifteenth, or Twenty-Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution," Schroeder ruled in a 485-page opinion.
The case was brought by the North Carolina Conference of the NAACP, a trio of churches and several individual plaintiffs. The Obama administration also sided with those who said that the new law would prevent voters qualified to vote from casting a ballot.
"I've not read the full opinion, but it appears the federal district court paid close attention to the evidence that was presented," said Senate President Pro Tem .
In addition to keeping North Carolina's voter ID law in effect, the federal court ruling also says other changes made by Republican lawmakers at the same time will stand. Most notably, Schroeder ruled that a prohibition on out-of-precinct voting – when a voter comes to the wrong polling place on Election Day – should take effect after the North Carolina's June primary. That means the strict in-precinct provisions will be in effect for the November election.
"Just like those who carried on before us, we will continue our movement challenging regressive and discriminatory voter suppression tactics on behalf of African Americans, Latinos, seniors, students and all those for whom democracy has been denied," said the Rev. William Barber, president of the North Carolina Conference of the NAACP.
Barber's group has scheduled a conference call for Tuesday to talk about next steps.
"The sweeping barriers imposed by this law undermine voter participation and have an overwhelmingly discriminatory impact on African-Americans. This ruling does not change that reality. We are already examining an appeal," said Dale Ho, director of the ACLU's Voting Rights Project.
Meanwhile, Gov. Pat McCrory hailed the ruling Monday night.
"This ruling further affirms that requiring a photo ID in order to vote is not only common-sense, it's constitutional," McCrory said. "Common practices like boarding an airplane and purchasing Sudafed require photo ID and thankfully a federal court has ensured our citizens will have the same protection for their basic right to vote."
April 26, 2016 at 10:03 am
Norm Kelly says:
The Rev Buffet Slayer is a typical lib. Duped, but typical.
Doesn't like a law, takes it to court to overturn. Just like lib pols: when they can't get their liberal/socialist agenda passed through the normal legislative process, they force their schemes on us by having the courts rule in their favor.
Even when every court agrees that NC's voting rule changes are constitutional, this duped lib refuses to give up. Losses at every turn do not mean defeat to a lib. The good rev slayer will do his darndest to stir up the black vote to overturn the Republican majority. Then, in a backroom deal, lib pols will agree with their lib-supporting black brother and repeal all voting changes. In addition, the allies will work on a plan to remove all protections against voter fraud, allowing even more illegals or dead people to vote for demons.
As I've said all along, what is it about blacks that makes them incapable of identifying themselves in order to vote? (libs: beware! it's not me claiming blacks are incapable, it's their leaders, pastors, and demon pol allies! it's not me being racist, it's them.) When lib pols passed legislation forcing people to show photo ID to pick up a prescription, this was not considered discriminatory. And in the case of voting, 'the state' (meaning those of us who pay taxes) would pay for the poor, illiterate blacks to get a photo ID, but not in the case of prescriptions. For some reason, forcing blacks to purchase their own ID to pick up a prescription WAS NOT racist or discriminatory. But, for the same illogical undefined reason, buying a picture ID for blacks to prove who they are in order to vote is considered racist and discriminatory.
But, one thought that obviously escapes the 'intelligence' of the good rev buffet and most other black 'leaders': if they have been forced by their demon allies to get a picture ID, at full cost, to pick up a prescription, why can't they use that same picture ID to prove who they are to vote? Isn't a valid picture ID they pay for also a valid picture ID for voting? If not, why not? If it wasn't racist when libs did it, why is it racist when Republicans do it? And why is it considered a poll tax? First the state will pay for it. Second it wasn't considered a prescription tax.
Has anyone asked either the good rev OR the editorial board of the Raleigh N&D why they choose to call one racist and the other is a good thing? Of course not. Everyone has learned not to ask a good lib why their schemes and claims are valid because libs have proven they simply change the subject when it's pointed out how f00lish their blatherings are!
Once again, the judge got it right. Which means we'll hear even more from the buffet slayer. And the N&D will rant endlessly on what a bad decision this was, and probably claim the judge is a racist.
April 26, 2016 at 4:48 pm
Richard L Bunce says:
The new definition of disparate impact... not enough Democratic Party candidates get elected... vote by mail... vote anytime, no photo ID required, don't even have to leave the house.
