Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig
it's really got nothing to do with discrimination at all. however, unless dems can make it a case of discrimination, then the voting laws would be upheld, and id's could be required. since no other act requiring i.d. has been found to be discriminatory, i don't understand why it would be in this case.
|
You might read
the court opinions that have already come down overturning these laws as discriminatory, rather than ignoring that exists.
Quote:
|
i'd like to see it go thru the courts, so i can get the legal reason as to why, in voting alone, requirement of id is a form of discrimination...but not for getting a job, getting utilities turned on, and myriad other acts in our daily lives.
|
LOL - complete and obvious ignorance of the subject matter, such as
the court case results already posted in this thread, doesn't help your cause.
As they say, ignorance is bliss.
Nobody is saying the requirement of an ID is discriminatory. The courts are saying narrowing the requirement to only certain types of ID, less than the various types of ID that are acceptable now, is discriminatory.