It’s not racist to think African Americans are incapable of obtaining an ID?
North Carolina wanted to reinstate its voter ID law in time for the elections, but a deadlocked Supreme Court denied them this opportunity. From The Wall Street Journal:
The high court, in a brief written order, declined to stay an appeals court ruling from July that struck down North Carolina’s Republican-backed voting rules. The appeals court found state lawmakers enacted the rules with the intent to discriminate against black voters.
This decision is YUGE because the state is slowly turning blue. Incumbent GOP Senator Richard Burr faces a tough election in November against Democrat Deborah Ross. Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has made the state a high priority, which has led to her rising in the polls. As Clinton rises, so does Ross.
The North Carolina government enacted the law in 2013, which included “a tightening in voter ID requirements, cutbacks on early voting and the preregistration of 16-year-olds.” But the appeals court ruled these parts as unconstitutional:
The appeals court ruling struck down five parts of the law: its voter ID requirements, a rollback of early voting to 10 days from 17, an elimination of same-day registration and of preregistration of some teenagers, and its ban on counting votes cast in the wrong precinct.
The Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals even called the law “the most restrictive voting law North Carolina has seen since the era of Jim Crow.” The judges insisted the items in the law “were were used disproportionately by African-Americans, who overwhelmingly voted Democratic.” They even lashed out at the government “for accepting some forms of photo IDs but not others, such as identification cards held by people who received public assistance from the state.”
The North Carolina government didn’t even ask for the Supreme Court to reinstate all of the parts the appeals court shot down. It would allow “same-day registration and out-of-precinct voting this time around.”
The justices did not provide a reasoning in their brief. This is where each justice stood on the case:
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy and Samuel Alito would have allowed North Carolina to proceed with most of the changes blocked by the 4th Circuit, the Supreme Court said in an order released Wednesday afternoon. Justice Clarence Thomas would have allowed the state to implement all the provisions blocked by the lower court.
The four justices in the court’s liberal wing stood with the 4th Circuit. In the case of a four-four split, the lower court’s ruling is allowed to stand.
Some jeered the ruling, while others cheered it:
Gov. Pat McCrory, a Republican who is seeking re-election this fall, asserted that North Carolina had “been denied basic voting rights already granted to more than 30 states.” He noted that four justices had supported the state’s position and that “four liberal justices blocked North Carolina protections afforded by our sensible voter laws.”
“This decision opens the door for fair and full access to the democratic process for all voters,” said Allison Riggs, a lawyer for the Southern Coalition for Social Justice. “Hundreds of thousands of North Carolinians will now be able to vote without barriers. The voting booth is the one place where everyone is equal and where we all have the same say.”
The Supreme Court will also probably hear about the Texas and Wisconsin voter ID laws before November.DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.