Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist
“I am disappointed by this ruling. In recent years, we have seen how important every vote is, not just for local elections, but all the way up to the Presidency. I believe we should be doing everything possible to ensure that everyone who is entitled to vote should be able to vote, and not place insurmountable roadblocks in their way.
Unfortunately, by leaving the Indiana voter photo ID law in place, the Supreme Court has not only imperiled the rights of thousands of vulnerable voters with no ready access to photo IDs, but the court has potentially opened the floodgates to new rounds of similar politically motivated voting laws.
As the saying goes, Dianne Feinstein “Shot herself in the foot,” in the video below. How is it possible to go from being a strong proponent of the Attorney Generals office acting appropriately with little or no recollection of her remarks 5 years later? The answer quite simply, Feinstein has been nothing more than political hack virtually her entire political career.
The bottom line is that there is no evidence that in-person vote fraud, the kind of fraud that would be prevented by voter photo IDs, is a problem. Yet, voter ID laws create a serious burden for elderly voters, low-income voters, students, and minorities , those whose voting rights we should be seeking to affirm rather than challenge.
(Will somebody please wake up the 79-year-old senator and advise her that the elderly must show photo identification to apply for Medicare and Social Security, while students must show the same to register for school?)
Apparently Senator Feinstein is playing the race card, looking our for “minority voters,” while at the same time pandering to her constituents who believe in class warfare in her false excuse of looking out for low-income voters.
I filed an amicus brief opposing this law. I urged the Supreme Court to respect the balance struck in the Help America Vote Act—where there was flexibility in establishing voter identification. As written, Indiana voters may be required to show multiple forms of identification to comply with state laws.
If this law is enforced in a major presidential election, I’m afraid we will see many otherwise qualified voters turned away at the polls. The Supreme Court should be protecting the right to vote, not undermining it.” (If this law is enforced, is she now suggesting that the United States Supreme Court ruling not be followed?)
Senator Feinestein, in one sentence has managed to completely destroy any possibile relevance or concern she tried to articulate on this issue. Yes we have seen how important every vote is, yet she remained silent when the Obama Justice Department, under the feckless leadership of Attorney General Eric Holder overturned the conviction for voter intimidation in the New Black Panther voter intimidation case of voter intimidation in Philadelphia.
New Black Panthers: Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson, two men arrested in 2008 Philadelphia voter intimidation case.