Archive

Voter ID: Integrity trumps fraud | TribLIVE.com
Editorials

Voter ID: Integrity trumps fraud

Score one for the vindication of voter-identification laws over their vilification by politicos with suspicious purposes: The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals — not exactly known for its conservative bent — has upheld Arizona’s voter ID law.

That’s a shot across the bow for the U.S. Justice Department and its crusade against voter ID laws, which 30 states (including Pennsylvania) will enforce come November. Justice has blocked an ID law in Texas and a state judge has enjoined a similar law in Wisconsin.

The arguments against voter ID laws and, supposedly, voters’ “disenfranchisement” simply don’t hold up.

As Judge Sandra Ikuta writes for the court, Arizona’s “photo identification requirement is not an invidious restriction,” nor does it trample the 14th Amendment’s equal-protection clause.

But voter fraud is a fact, evidenced by the crooks convicted of it.

Unfortunately, the 9th Circuit ruled against Arizona’s mandate that requires people to prove their citizenship in order to vote — a measure intended to stop illegal aliens from voting. That issue likely will end up before the U.S. Supreme Court, says Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne, who plans to appeal.

And so the fight goes on to protect and ensure the integrity of Americans’ votes.


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.