Ok, I'm ready to party like it's 1999 but I put a question mark to the story only because the news is just in at HuffingtonPost and it's a developing story. However, apparently this law won't be used during this election-which is right at a minimum. After all, other states that have used such laws have phased them in over a period of years.
"A judge is postponing Pennsylvania's tough new voter identification requirement, ordering that it not be enforced in the presidential election."
"Tuesday's ruling comes just five weeks before the election. An appeal is possible. The 6-month-old law requires each voter to show a valid photo ID."
"Democrats and groups including the AARP and NAACP mounted a furious opposition to a law Republicans say is necessary to prevent election fraud. Critics have accused Republicans of using old-fashioned Jim Crow tactics to steal the White House and have highlighted stories of registered voters struggling to get a state photo ID."
"The law was already a partisan lightning rod when a top Republican lawmaker boasted that it'd allow GOP nominee Mitt Romney to beat Democratic President Barack Obama in Pennsylvania."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/pennsylvania-voter-id-ruling_n_1919187.html
This sounds like a victory though some caution is necesary till we get more details. I notice that Talking Points Memo's version is more qualifed:
"A Pennsylvania judge partially blocked the state's voter ID law on Tuesday in a ruling that will still allow poll workers to ask for identification at the polling place. Under the judge's ruling, the state will be forced to accept provisional ballots from individuals who lack identification without that individual having to show photo identity within six days of the election."
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/judge-partially-blocks-pennsylvania-voter-id-law
So it sounds like a victory but we'll watch for more detail.
No comments:
Post a Comment