Michael Hiltzik writes for the LA Times:
To be sure, it’s not certain that any of these rulings will stand. the Arkansas ruling has already been stayed by a higher court. UCI’s Hasen observes that some of the Wisconsin judge’s legal interpretations are “controversial.”
But taken together, the rulings certainly show that voter ID laws, properly attacked in court, are far from impregnable. These laws are nothing but cynical attacks on voting rights. Even federal appellate judge Richard Posner, who earlier upheld an Indiana voter ID law, has come around, acknowledging recently that these laws are all about voter suppression, not the eradication of fraud. Young, Clinton, and Ornstein should get behind the legal effort to overturn them instead of appeasing their perpetrators.
WI AG van Hollen on yesterday’s voter id decision.
I’m not sure why Justice Stevens doesn’t simply retire, given that he is not hearing any cases. Then there would be no controversy whatsoever about the propriety of his testimony.
The latest from Wisconsin.
Judiciary Committee hearing coming in June.
RNLA: “In RNLA’s to the PCEA report, we agreed with the PCEA’s recommendation that states should adopt the use of electronic pollbooks for the reasons outlined in the PCEA report. We also see additional value for electronic pollbooks as a potential fraud deterrent by including voters’ photographs in the check-in record.”
Democratic attacks on the Koch brothers for secretive campaign spending have become a virtual plank in the party’s platform, but it turns out big-money liberals can be just as defensive when their own closed-door activities are put in the spotlight.
During a gathering here of major Democratic donors this week that has raised more than $30 million for liberal groups, questions about the party’s split personality on the issue were dodged, rejected or answered with an array of rationalizations. That is, when they weren’t met with recriminations or even gentle physical force.