North Carolina judges block voter ID law, saying it discriminates against Black people

[NWRatCon]

Nonsense.

There's no reason in the world that blacks can't get ID's.

None.

You don't live in the real world, my friend. Or, you're lying to yourself.

 

[NWRatCon]

A lack of proof of voter fraud seems like a legit excuse to me.

It's a fundamental principle of Constitutional law. Even under the "rational basis" standard. But, then, I'm one of the DP posters with a law degree. (in my case, I do actually have one, and am licensed in multiple jurisdictions.)

 

[Big Steve]

The average cost of obtaining a birth certificate in the United States is $50.00

That's not even a little bit close to be accurate.

The average cost to obtain a birth certificate in the United States, as of 2018, was $17.15: https://ballotpedia.org/Birth_certificate_costs_by_state,_2018

So, unless you can show where individual states have raised their prices astronomically, $50 to get a birth certificate is simply false.

Good rant, though...

 

[Big Steve]

You don't live in the real world, my friend. Or, you're lying to yourself.

Wow, what a tremendously convincing argument.

Or not.

There's no reason they can't get them. They get driver's licenses, don't they? Don't they need to have an ID to open a bank account or write a check?

 

[DataPoint]

Shame on those North Carolina judges for refusing to support laws that prevent crooked elections.

The United States Supreme Court may not have the courage to support the law because the conservative justices are already shaking in their boots at the possibility of court packing.

What crooked elections? You guys have not shown the need for any such laws.

 

[trouble13]

North Carolina judges block voter ID law, saying it discriminates against Black people

A panel of North Carolina judges in a split decision blocked the state's voter ID law, saying it discriminates against Black people.

www.cnbc.com

Whether by discriminatory Jim Crow voting laws or by racial gerrymandering, Republicans are always working to stifle the votes of people of color.

If they put as much energy into formulating policies that appeal to all voters, they wouldn't need to rig the election process.

This is where Republicans blow it, imo.

If photo IDs are racist as the court is claiming, Republicans should write a law that bans requiring an ID for anything and everything. Force the court to reconcile that with this ruling.

 

[NWRatCon]

That's not even a little bit close to be accurate.

The average cost to obtain a birth certificate in the United States, as of 2018, was $17.15: https://ballotpedia.org/Birth_certificate_costs_by_state,_2018

So, unless you can show where individual states have raised their prices astronomically, $50 to get a birth certificate is simply false.

Good rant, though...

Not accurate. Again demonstrating you don't know what the **** you're talking about. That does not include the additional fees. The certificate itself is $17+, then mailing $12 (certified mail), then copying/certifying fees $11-25, and other "processing fees". Go ahead, try it yourself. (I've done this for a living.) What you get for $17 won't get you a license, because it won't be "certified".

 

[Big Steve]

Not accurate. That does not include the additional fees. The certificate itself is $17+, then mailing $12 (certified mail), then copying fees $11-25, and other "processing fees". Go ahead, try it yourself. (I've done this for a living.)

Last time I got a copy of my birth certificate (I was born in New York) I was out of pocket $33, all in. That was maybe five or six years ago.

A copy of their birth certificate is something everyone should have. Not having it because the cost is perceived to be too much is a weak excuse...

 

[trouble13]

This is not a "big government" issue... ID's are required to do just about anything in our society now.

You need an ID to:
Buy Alcohol
Buy Cigarettes
Open a bank account
Apply for food stamps
Apply for welfare
Apply for Medicaid/Social Security
Apply for unemployment or a job
Rent/buy a house, apply for a mortgage
Drive/buy/rent a car
Get on an airplane
Get married
Purchase a gun
Adopt a pet
Rent a hotel room
Apply for a hunting license
Apply for a fishing license
Buy a cell phone
Visit a casino
Pick up a prescription
Hold a rally or protest
Donate blood
Buy an "M" rated video game
Purchase nail polish at CVS
Purchase certain cold medicines

Exactly right and if republicans had any brains they would take that to court. If requiring a person trying to vote to present a photo idea we must also conclude that it is racist to require an ID for all the things listed. Nobody should be forced to show an ID for anything ever again since it's racist to require it. As we have been told by the court.

 

[NWRatCon]

Last time I got a copy of my birth certificate (I was born in New York) I was out of pocket $33, all in. That was maybe five or six years ago.

A copy of their birth certificate is something everyone should have. Not having it because the cost is perceived to be too much is a weak excuse...

Lucky you. Like I said... "not in the real world." In many States, for many workers, that would literally be a half a day's wages.

 

[holbritter]

Lucky you. Like I said... "not in the real world." In many States, for many workers, that would literally be a half a day's wages.

BS. hyperbole

 

[Big Steve]

Lucky you. Like I said... "not in the real world." In many States, for many workers, that would literally be a half a day's wages.

So what?

If it's half a day's wages, suck it up and spend it to obtain a copy of a birth certificate.

Sorry, but trying to subsist on minimum age isn't a valid excuse...

 

[NWRatCon]

So what?

If it's half a day's wages, suck it up and spend it to obtain a copy of a birth certificate.

Sorry, but trying to subsist on minimum age isn't a valid excuse...

I like how you ignore everything else that undermines your position and harp on one point that was inaccurate to begin with, shifting the goal post... no, wait. I don't like it. But I do notice it.

 

[Big Steve]

I like how you ignore everything else that undermines your position and harp on one point that was inaccurate to begin with, shifting the goal post... no, wait. I don't like it. But I do notice it.

I don't have to move anything anywhere.

You've not proven that it's too great an onus for a black person to get an ID.

I think that suggestion is ignorant and lacks vision...

 

[NWRatCon]

I don't have to move anything anywhere.

You've not proven that it's too great an onus for a black person to get an ID.

I think that suggestion is ignorant and lacks vision...

You can think what you want, on your own, in your own little made-up world unconnected to the real one. I can't stop that. But, I don't need to consider it, either. Be well.

 

[NWRatCon]

I do find it astounding (and oh-so-unsurprising), that I can post a detailed recitation of the problems with the arguments and not get a single response to any of those points. So much for the "debate" part of the forum name.

 

[rahl]

Nope. I think we covered this already.

Then your position is hypocritical and invalid. There is absolutely no reason anyone can’t obtain an ID.

 

[NWRatCon]

Then your position is hypocritical and invalid. There is absolutely no reason anyone can’t obtain an ID.

Except, of course, all the ones I listed earlier.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

My personal opinion is the influx of money from the powerful through corporations acting as people is not healthy for a constitutional republic.

You must have a point and I suspect I am walking into something but there it is.

Sounds like you're getting "spun up ... when the American system [you] pretend to support doesn't go [your] way."

 

[NWRatCon]

Okay, in a nutshell:
1) Voter ID laws are generally unnecessary.
2) they are ineffective.
3) they are constitutionally dubious, because
4) they are unduly burdensome.
5) they are (deliberately) discriminatory.
And, it's not all about voter ID.

1) They are not about "securing the vote", but securing the vote from some. In the absence of evidence of in person voter fraud, they are unnecessary. They solve a problem that doesn't exist (more of that later).

2) They don't do what they're advertised to do. First, see #1. Second, if one is determined to cheat, they can fake an ID. Everyone knows that happens every night, at every bar in the United States.

3) Voting is a fundamental right. Fundamental rights require "strict scrutiny" when they are infringed. Strict scrutiny means a compelling state interest, secured by an effective means, with the least burden on the holder of that right. These laws meet none of these requirements.

4) Cost, time, and delay are major burdens (as outlined in #50 above). In some cases (like foreign birth), meeting requirements may be impossible.

5) These laws are discriminatory on numerous bases, especially when particular "exceptions" are included (like hunting licenses), and others are denied (like student IDs).

 

[Indlib]

Sounds like you're getting "spun up ... when the American system [you] pretend to support doesn't go [your] way."

Aha. The trap is sprung!

Well played.

However, merely not liking a ruling is different then claiming the judges made a decision because they think...

"these are the same judges that believe nearly all minorities are either too stupid, or too poor to acquire these IDs."

But hey, the right playing the race card is all the fad these days.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

Aha. The trap is sprung!

Well played.

However, merely not liking a ruling is different then claiming the judges made a decision because they think...

"these are the same judges that believe nearly all minorities are either too stupid, or too poor to acquire these IDs."

But hey, the right playing the race card is all the fad these days.

Actually, he said they gave no discriminatory reason at all.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Actually, he said they gave no discriminatory reason at all.

The court's ruling is 211 pages. The OP article didn't go into the discriminatory details.

But to state that discriminatory details don't exist when in fact they are the nexus for this ruling is just sheer stupidity.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

The judge's ruling is 211 pages. The OP article didn't go into the discriminatory details.

But to state that discriminatory details don't exist when in fact they are the nexus for this ruling is just sheer stupidity.

Not the point of this particular exchange.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Not the point of this particular exchange.

Then be more specific with your posts.