House of Eratosthenes

Let’s go into a ilttle background. In October, Murphy sat in judgment of the constitutionality of a state law requiring voters to prove their identities. He struck this down because, hey, not everybody has a driver’s license, not everybody has a National ID card, and among the people who lack both, there are a lot of poor people. If you charge money for an ID and require the ID to vote, this effectively becomes a “poll tax” and is unconstitutional.

So the Georgia legislature went back and made a new law with a whole bunch of free stuff in it. If you can’t get a driver’s license, you can have a ID card. If you can’t afford one, we’ll pay for it.

Not good enough, says Murphy. It still violates equal-protection laws. How it does, now that everything’s free…I’m not sure.

Courts block Georgia’s voter photo ID law
Rulings mean voters won’t have to show them, at least this year
Wednesday, July 12, 2006; Posted: 6:49 p.m. EDT (22:49 GMT)

ROME, Georgia (AP) — The same federal judge who threw out Georgia’s voter ID law last year blocked the state Wednesday from enforcing its revised law during this year’s elections.

The ruling came less than two hours after the Georgia Supreme Court denied the state’s emergency request to overrule a state court order that blocked enforcement of the new photo ID law during next week’s primary elections and any runoffs.

U.S. District Judge Harold Murphy’s ruling, which he delivered verbally from the bench, was much broader, also including the November 7 general elections and any runoffs.

If the rulings stand, Georgia voters will not have to show a government-issued photo ID to cast a ballot this year. The state’s primary election — which would have been the first election for which the IDs were required — is scheduled for Tuesday.

Murphy said the state’s latest attempt at requiring voter photo IDs discriminated against people who don’t have driver’s licenses, passports or other government-issued IDs.

“That is the failure of this legislation as it stands,” he said.

In October, the judge rejected a more-stringent voter ID requirement, saying it amounted to an unconstitutional poll tax because of the fees associated with getting the required ID. This year, the Legislature passed a law that made the IDs free and available in all counties.

Murphy commended lawmakers for addressing problems with the previous version but said more work is needed. The latest version still denies citizens equal protection under the law, he said.

But, “The court never said there cannot be a proper voter ID law,” he said.

The state can still appeal the ruling.

Republican Gov. Sonny Perdue and other supporters of requiring IDs had argued they were needed to prevent election fraud. Civil rights groups challenged the law in both federal and state court, arguing that it discriminated against poor, elderly and rural voters.

During a day of testimony before Murphy issued his decision, American Civil Liberties Union attorney Neil Bradley argued that making voters go to county registrar’s offices to get a required ID was an inconvenience that did nothing to address fraud at the ballot box.

I have a question. And a theory. Actually the question is based on another theory, so I have two theories, one of which is in support of a question.

First, the theory that does not support a question. I don’t think the civil rights groups give a fig about the poor, elderly and rural voters. Don’t these people need to go somewhere sometimes? Don’t they need to go see doctors? If so, don’t they have a civil right to get that done? Where’s the lawsuit to force the doctor to make a house call?

Second theory, the one that does support a question. Theory: If I’m a Georgia voter, and there is fraud taking place — nobody’s sticking their neck out, here, and saying there isn’t — a vote cast in opposition to my own votes, fraudulently so, violates my own Equal Protection guarantees. Effectively, I’m not being allowed to vote. My vote is being cancelled out by someone else’s. That’s what is supposed to happen in a democratic society, but in this case, that someone-else isn’t a real person. Equal Protection is supposed to have something to do with voting, and my votes are being systematically nullified.

So the question is obvious. What about the civil rights of legitimate Georgia voters? It seems Judge Murphy, here, has forgotten how the voting process works. Somehow, if your vote is nullified because you weren’t able to get your voter ID, your equal-protection guarantee has gone unfulfilled, but if your vote is nullified because it was countered by some dead guy, or a doppleganger, or an illegal alien or a little-green-man, that’s all okay. For now. So we’re selective about which defeated vote represents an equal-protection violation. If we aren’t going to be selective, then you know what? This year’s election will have to be cancelled. After all, equal protection is equal protection…we’re deserving of protection for our constitional guarantees, all of us, or else none of us are.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Selectively EqualThursday, July 13th, 2006

Selectively Equal
Thursday, July 13th, 2006