Opponents of election integrity lost the latest in a long string of cases recently when a three-judge panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated North Dakota's voter ID requirement and tossed out an injunction that had been issued by a lower court.
North Dakota is the only state in the Union that does not require citizens to register to vote.
If a voter's ID is missing any of those three items, the voter will still be able to cast a ballot if he provides the missing information with a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, or a check or other document issued by a federal, state, or local government agency.
The majority rejected the plaintiffs' contention that requiring voters to have a residential street address is discriminatory, citing former Associate Justice John Paul Stevens' opinion in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, in which the Supreme Court upheld Indiana's voter ID requirement.
A "Residential street address furthers North Dakota's legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud and safeguarding voter confidence, so unlike a poll tax, it is not invidiously 'unrelated to voter qualifications.'".
As pointed out in a recent study by the National Bureau of Economic Research, voter ID laws have no discernible effect on reducing the turnout of voters.
Although election integrity measures such as voter ID requirements are often presented as a partisan issue, they should not be.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/08/08/voter-id-opponents-lose-again-this-time-in-north-dakota/
North Dakota is the only state in the Union that does not require citizens to register to vote.
If a voter's ID is missing any of those three items, the voter will still be able to cast a ballot if he provides the missing information with a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, or a check or other document issued by a federal, state, or local government agency.
The majority rejected the plaintiffs' contention that requiring voters to have a residential street address is discriminatory, citing former Associate Justice John Paul Stevens' opinion in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, in which the Supreme Court upheld Indiana's voter ID requirement.
A "Residential street address furthers North Dakota's legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud and safeguarding voter confidence, so unlike a poll tax, it is not invidiously 'unrelated to voter qualifications.'".
As pointed out in a recent study by the National Bureau of Economic Research, voter ID laws have no discernible effect on reducing the turnout of voters.
Although election integrity measures such as voter ID requirements are often presented as a partisan issue, they should not be.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/08/08/voter-id-opponents-lose-again-this-time-in-north-dakota/
No comments:
Post a Comment