The state Supreme Court Monday refused to hear Voter ID cases stemming from suits brought by two different plaintiffs.
Justices issued one-page opinions on each of the lawsuits from the Milwaukee NAACP and the , but declined to comment on why they refuse to hear either one, according to WisPolitics.com.
A temporary injunction was issued first by one Dane County judge and a . There is a trial that started today and now will proceed based on lawsuits filed by the Milwaukee branch of the NAACP and Voces de la Frontera. Both groups claim the law, which requires voters to show a photo ID before they can cast a ballot, disenfranchises minorities, the elderly, the disabled and students among others.
The state Department of Justice has appealed both injunctions, and it was the appellate court that asked the Supreme Court to review the cases. Now that the state's high court has refused to hear either case, both suits are back under the appeals court's jurisdiction.
Surely you've seen the video where a young white guy walks into Eric Holders Washinton DC polling place, claims to be him and they practically fall over each other to hand him the US Attorney Generals ballot? http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/08/DC-Polling-Place-Holder-Ballot You have no clue how much voter fraud there is because nobody is even trying to stop it let alone begin to quantify the total disenfranchisement.
Where in the Constitutional right to bear arms does it state that such a right is selective and not privy to all citizens, as I'm having problems finding such language?
The GAB did not catch this.
Apparently, you missed one of Schmitz's earlier comments over on another board wherein he dismissed Politifact's legitimacy. Your girl Rachel Maddow also has issues with Politifact's rating system. I'm surprised that you, the purveyor of conducting independent research, would hold in such high regard the assessments conducted by Politifact. I though that you were more independent than that.
Neither is the Daily Kos, but that hasn't stopped you from citing that propagandist rag time and again here on the Patch. Funny how right-wing blogs are trash, while the left-wing blogs are acceptable sources of information to you. Your hypocrisy is once again showing.
Violent felons can not buy a firearm and are not supposed to vote, but we only verify their ID for firearm purchases?
1) The GAB didn't give much scrutiny to the petition signatures because Walker chose not to challenge them. 2) The $7M figure included the cost of additional security that was necessary during the Capitol 'occupation.' 3) Curbs on public sector union privileges were necessary in order to effectuate the promise of assisting local units of government in containing their budgets given reduced state assistance and under the promised and delivered property tax freeze legislation. 4) Running fake candidates is just as legal as these frivolous recalls are, not to mention that such a tactic was heavily used by the Democrats in the past. But you'd know all this if in fact you were 'politically current,' wouldn't you? Try again.
No one is trying to take away anyone's right - we merely want to preserve the integrity of our elections. You like to assert the premise that a lack of prosecutions conclusively proves that voter fraud doesn't exist, correct? So, how many complaints of disenfranchisement were there during this February's primary elections when Voter ID legislation was in effect? In fact, I can't find a single report of a complaint being made to the GAB claiming disenfranchisement, can you? So, using your own logic, I guess that conclusively proves that Voter ID does not cause voter disenfranchisement. Case closed.
There was a lot of talk of bussing in public sector union sympathizers from Ohio and other states and housing them for the required 28 day residency requirement for the sole purpose of having them vote in our recall elections. Of course, such an act would still constitute a violation of the intent element of our elector qualification statute, but that didn't stop the strategy from being discussed on many leftist facebook pages or county Democratic Party meetings. If you were 'politically current,' then surely you would have been aware of such situation. Cheers!
Instead of worrying about their public image, the Supreme Court should just suck it up and do its job already!
the Voter ID Law case, now the court process will have to play out. This is good. The consideration of the court cases, all the way through the process of appeal, will highlight the parts of this law that are flawed. Many good amendments were ignored by the legislature to fix this law when it was considered in both the Senate and Assembly sessions. Tax money could have been saved if legislators would have passed a good Voter ID law instead of the voter suppression law that we ended up with. Soon they will have to consider legislation to fix it. More honest pragmatic leaders would have truly collaborated and found the compromises that would have helped all of us to collectively deal with this issue and all the REAL issues facing this state. I urge Wisconsin citizens to elect such leaders.
Does anybody else find this whole process a little odd, since when can a judge over ride what our sitting government officials and the citizens of this state have voted for? If this is any indication of what's to come, then what is the purpose of having referendums or voting? It really won't matter what we the citizens want because we now know that the judges sitting in Dane County have the authority to overturn the outcome of the vote anyways...And doesn't anybody also find this odd that one of these judges also signed the recall for Gov. Walker...I always thought they were supposed to be impartial, I guess that's changed too...
Acorn is not gone, just renamed.
I will also point out that a birth certificate doesn't really prove you are whom you claim to be, since I have changed greatly in appearance since 1949. An amendment allowing people who have difficulty locating and obtaining a birth certificate to prove their citizenship with alternate means, especially in the case of previously registered voters, would have solved a lot of problems, as would a voter photo ID issued at the time of registration. As for judges overriding legislation -- that's how our three branches of government work. When our legislators pass laws that contravene our state constitution, it's up to the judiciary to tell them to go back and get it right.
I have never bought a gun, but does the purchase require a specific form of photo ID where one had to prove US citizenship with a birth certificate?
http://www.thedailypage.com/daily/article.php?article=33534 "Senate Democrats spent over nine hours proposing amendments to the Voter Identification Bill (AB-7) Tuesday, only to have Sen. Joe Leibham (R-Sheboygan) motion to table each amendment. Each motion passed along party lines, and all of the Democrats' amendments were tabled without debate from Senate Republicans."
I don't recall any Republican running on passing voter ID.
At some point he had to have either/both a birth certificate and/or a social security card, otherwise he would not have been able to serve in the military and/or collect disability payments. He does not fall into your rapidly vanishing group. The other example given was a single mother from Mississippi who could not locate her birth certificate because of fire/flood issues. explain then how she was able to obtain benefits here in wisconsin to support herself and her 7 children, one of which is getting social security disability every month, if she has never had any form of identification in the form of a birth certificate or a social security card? Im a democrat and a liberal, and I firmly believe in verified ID. Heck I also think everyone should have a DNA sample on file with their prints and current photo! Think how quickly all those non supported babies would have their daddies found!