The voter ID ruling: A poison pill
Under the standard set by the state Supreme Court in remanding Pennsylvania's contested voter ID law to Commonwealth Court, there never can be such a law in Penn's Wood.
The high court, ruling 4-2 on Tuesday, gave Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson until Oct. 2 to determine if the state is providing “liberal” access to new photo ID cards or if any voter will be unable to cast a ballot because of the voter ID law. (It was Judge Simpson who, in August, declined to enjoin the law's implementation.)
But by the Supreme Court's standard, any voter — perhaps someone who's never voted and has no intention of voting but is recruited by any anti-voter ID sympathizers? — effectively can scotch the law.
The fix is in.
Surely if Simpson upholds his original ruling, the ACLU will produce a perpetual supply of “disenfranchised voters” in a perpetual line of appeals.
Thus, the Supreme Court's ruling is a poison pill bordering on a Hobson's choice that will guarantee that elections in Pennsylvania will continue to be loosey-goosey affairs.
Gee, what's next, an orchestrated attack on voter registration because a potential registrant supposedly doesn't have “access” to a readily available voter registration form?
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
- Steelers-Texans game changers: Bell’s 43-yard catch provides spark
- Steelers use 3 late first-half TDs to stun Texans
- Rookie Bryant sparks deep passing game
- Rossi: Steelers’ season all about going big
- 12-year-old’s donated heart joins families, lets her memory live
- Steelers notebook: Adams replaces concussed Gilbert
- Geibel goalie saves game during shootout, beats Carlynton
- Demand for hazmat suits due to Ebola outbreak triples firm’s production
- Pittsburgh police officers start wearing video cameras
- Bortuzzo, if healthy, could provide much-needed physical presence on blue line for Penguins
- Serra Catholic boys soccer team loses WPIAL 1st-round game to Avonworth, 1-0